THE ROLE FOR POLICE IN ADDRESSING

ALCOHOL-RELATED HARM INSIDE AND OUTSIDE

LICENSED PREMISES

Peter Martin APM

Bachelor of Arts (Justice Administration) (Griffith University)

Executive Masters in Public Administration (Australia and New Zealand School of

Government and Griffith University)

A thesis submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy,

Queensland University of Technology,

Centre for Accident Research and Road Safety – Queensland,

Brisbane, Australia.

2013

i

KEY WORDS

Police, licensed premises, police strategies, policing licensed premises, reducing

harm inside licensed premises, reducing alcohol-related harm, harm minimisation strategies

by police, reducing crime and antisocial behaviour, police and alcohol.

ii

ABSTRACT

Alcohol consumption is enmeshed with Australian culture (Palk, 2008) and the use

and misuse of alcohol contributes to considerable health and social harms (Barbor et al.,

2010; English et al., 1995; Gutjahr, Gmel, & Rehm, 2001; Palk, 2008; Steenkamp,

Harrison, & Allsop, 2002). Despite shifts in the way that alcohol is consumed and how it is

used, it has been reported that one-third of all alcohol consumed is done so within licensed

premises (Lang, Stockwell, Rydon, & Gamble, 1992). Consequently, licensed premises are

over-represented as settings in which alcohol-related harms occur. These harms,

particularly those related to violence, are associated with particular licensed premises

operating in the night-time economy (Briscoe & Donnelly, 2001b; Chikritzhs, Stockwell, &

Masters, 1997; Homel, Tomsen, & Thommeny, 1991; Stockwell, 1997).

Police have a role in not only responding to the manifestation of harms, such as

crime, injuries, assaults, domestic violence, stealing and sexual offences, but they also have

a role in preventing problems, and thereby reducing alcohol and other drug-related harms

(Doherty & Roche, 2003). Given the extent of alcohol consumption within licensed

premises and the nature and extent of the harms, as well as the lack of opportunity to

influence outcomes in other settings (e.g. the home), licensed premises offer police and

other stakeholders a significant opportunity to influence positively the reduction of alcohol-

related harm.

This research focuses specifically on the police role in policing licensed premises.

Primarily, this research aims to investigate the factors which are relevant to why and how

police officers respond to alcohol-related incidents inside and outside licensed premises. It

examines the attitudes and beliefs of police and assesses their knowledge, capacity and

ability to effectively police licensed premises. The research methodology uses three

distinct surveys. Each contributes to understanding the motivations and practice of police

officers in this important area of harm reduction.

Study One involved a survey of police officers within a police district (Brisbane

Central District) in Queensland, Australia and used a comprehensive questionnaire

involving both quantitative and qualitative techniques. A key research outcome of Study

One was the finding that officers had low levels of knowledge of the strategies that are

effective in addressing alcohol-related harm both inside and outside licensed premises.

iii

Paradoxically, these officers also reported extensive recent experience in dealing with

alcohol issues in these locations. In addition, these officers reported that alcohol was a

significant contextual factor in the majority of matters to which they responded. Officers

surveyed reported that alcohol increased the difficulty of responding to situations and that

licensed premises (e.g. nightclubs, licensed clubs and hotels) were the most difficult

contexts to police.

Those surveyed were asked to self-assess their knowledge of the Liquor Act (Qld),

which is the primary legislative authority in Queensland for regulating licensed premises.

Surprisingly, well over half of the officers (65%) reported ‘no’ to ‘fair’ knowledge of the

Act, despite officers believing that their skill level to police such premises was in the ‘good

to very good range’. In an important finding, officers reported greater skill level to police

outside licensed premises than inside such premises, indicating that officers felt less

capable, from a skill perspective, to operate within the confines of a licensed premise than

in the environment immediately outside such premises. Another key finding was that

officers reported greater levels of training in responding to situations outside and around

licensed premises than to situations inside licensed premises.

Officers were also asked to identify the frequency with which they employed

specified regulatory enforcement and community-based strategies. Irrespective of the type

of response, ‘taking no action’ or passive policing interventions were not favoured by

officers. The findings identified that officers favoured taking a range of strategies (sending

home, releasing into the custody of friends, etc.) in preference to arrest.

In another key finding, officers generally reported their support for operational

stakeholder partnership approaches to policing licensed premises. This was evidenced by

the high number of officers (over 90%) reporting that there should be shared responsibility

for enforcing the provisions of the Liquor Act. Importantly, those surveyed also identified

the factors which constrain or prevent them from policing licensed premises.

Study Two involved interviewing a small but comprehensive group (n=11) of senior

managers from within the Queensland Police Service (QPS) who have responsibility for

setting operational and strategic policy. The aim of this study was to examine the attitudes,

perceptions and influence that senior officers (at the strategy and policy-setting level) had

on the officers at the operational level. This qualitative study was carried out using a

iv

purposive sampling (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005; Guba & Lincoln, 1989), focused interview

and thematic analytic approach. The interview participants were drawn from three tiers of

management at district, regional as well as the whole-of-organisational level.

The first key theme emerging from the study related to role, in terms of both the QPS

broader organisational role, and the individual officer role with respect to the policing of

licensed premises. For the QPS organisational role, participants at all three strategic levels

had a high degree of congruity as to the organisations service role; that is, to enhance public

safety. With respect to participants’ beliefs as to whether police officers have knowledge

and understanding of their individual roles concerning licensed premises (as opposed to the

QPS role), participants reported most commonly that officers had a reasonable to clear

understanding of their role. Participant comments also were supportive of the view that

officers operating in the research area, Brisbane Central District (BCD), had a clearer

understanding of their role than police operating in other locations.

The second key theme to emerge identified a disparity between the knowledge and

capability of specialist police, compared with general duties police, to police licensed

premises. In fact, a number of the responses to a variety of questions differentiated

specialist and general police in a range of domains. One such example related to the clarity

of understanding of officer role. Participants agreed that specialist police (Liquor

Enforcement & Proactive Strategies [LEAPS] officers) had more clarity of understanding

in terms of their role than generalist police. Participants also were strongly of the opinion

that specialist police had higher skill levels to deal with issues both inside and outside

licensed premises. Some participants expressed the view that general duty police

undertook purely response-related activities, or alternatively, dealt with lower order

matters. Conversely, it was viewed that specialist police undertook more complex tasks

because of their higher levels of knowledge and skill.

The third key theme to emerge concerned the identification of barriers that serve to

restrict or prevent police officers from policing licensed premises. Participant responses

strongly indicated that there was a diversity of resourcing barriers that restrict police from

undertaking their roles in licensed premises. Examples of such barriers were the lack of

police and the low ratio of police to patrons, available officer time, and lack of

organisational investment in skills and knowledge acquisition. However, some participants

v

indicated that police resourcing in the BCD was appropriate and officers were equipped

with sufficient powers (policy and legislation). Again, the issue of specialist police was

raised by one participant who argued that increasing the numbers of specialist police would

ameliorate the difficulties for police officers policing licensed premises.

The fourth and last key theme to emerge from Study Two related to the perception of

senior officers regarding the opportunity and capability of officers to leverage off external

partnerships to reduce harms inside and outside licensed premises. Police working in

partnership in BCD was seen as an effective harm reduction strategy and strongly

supported by the participants. All participants demonstrated a high degree of knowledge as

to who these partners were and could identify those government, non-government and

community groups precisely. Furthermore, the majority of participants also held strong

views that the partnerships were reasonably effective and worked to varying degrees

depending on the nature of the partnership and issues such as resourcing. These senior

officers identified better communication and coordination as factors that could potentially

strengthen these partnerships. This research finding is particularly important for senior

officers who have the capacity to shape the policy and strategic direction of the police

service, not only in Queensland but throughout Australasia.

Study Three examined the perceptions of those with links to the broader liquor

industry (government, non-government and community but exclusive of police) concerning

their understanding of the police role and the capacity of police to reduce alcohol-related

harm inside and outside licensed premises, and their attitudes towards police. Participants

(n=26) surveyed represented a range of areas including the liquor industry, business

represenatives and government representatives from Queensland Fire and Rescue Service,

Queensland Ambulance Service, Brisbane City Council and Queensland Health.

The first key theme to emerge from Study Three related to participant understanding

of the QPS organisational role, and importantly, individual officer role in policing licensed

premises. In terms of participant understanding of the QPS role there was a clear

understanding by the majority of participants that the police role was to act in ways

consistent with the law and to otherwise engage in a range of enforcement-related activities.

Participants saw such activities falling into two categories. The first category related to

reactive policing, which included actions around responding to trouble in licensed

vi

premises, monitoring crowd controllers and removing trouble-makers. In the second

category, proactive approaches, participants identified the following activities as consistent

with that approach: early intervention with offenders, support of licensed premises

operators and high visibility policing. When participants were asked about their

understanding of individual officer roles in the policing of licensed premises, a range of

responses were received but the consistent message that emerged was that there is a

different role to be played by general duty (uniformed) police compared to specialist

(LEAPS Unit) police, which reflects differences in knowledge, skill and capability.

The second key theme that emerged from the data related to the external

participants’ views of the knowledge and capability of specialist police, compared with

general duty police, to police licensed premises. As noted in the first key theme,

participants were universally of the view that the knowledge, skill and capability of police

in specialist units (LEAPS Unit) was at a higher level than that of general duty police.

Participants observed that these specialist officers were better trained than their colleagues

in generalist areas and were therefore better able to intervene knowledgeably and

authoritatively to deal with problems and issues as they emerged. Participants also reported

that officers working within BCD generally had a positive attitude to their duties and had

important local knowledge that they could use in the resolution of alcohol-related issues.

Participants also commented on the importance of sound and effective QPS leadership, as

well as the quality of the leadership in BCD. On both these measures, there was general

consensus from participants, who reported positively on the importance and effectiveness

of such leadership in BCD.

The third key theme to emerge from Study Three concerned the identification of

barriers that serve to restrict or prevent police officers from policing licensed premises.

Overwhelmingly, external participants reported the lack of human resources (i.e. police

officers) as the key barrier. Other resourcing limitations, such as available officer time,

police computer systems, and the time taken to charge offenders, were identified as

barriers. Some participants identified barriers in the liquor industry such as ‘dodgy

operators’ and negative media attention as limitations. Other constraints to emerge related

to government and policy barriers. These were reflected in comments about the collection

by government of fees from licensees and better ‘powers’ for police to deal with offenders.

vii

The fourth and final key theme that emerged from Study Three related to the

opportunities for and capability of police to leverage off external partnerships to reduce

harms inside and outside licensed premises. Not surprisingly, participants had a

comprehensive knowledge of a broad range of stakeholders, from a diversity of contexts,

influential in addressing issues in licensed premises. Many participants reported their

relationships with the police and other stakeholders as effective, productive and consistent

with the objectives of partnering to reduce alcohol-related harm. On the other hand, there

were those who were concerned with their relationship with other stakeholders, particularly

those with a compliance function (e.g. Office of Liquor & Gaming Regulation [OLGR]).

The resourcing limitations of partners and stakeholders were also raised as an important

constraining factor in fulfilling the optimum relationship. Again, political issues were

mentioned in terms of the impact on partnerships, with participants stating that there is at

times political interference and that politicians complicate the relationships of stakeholders.

There are some significant strengths with respect to the methodology of this

research. The research is distinguished from previous work in that it examines these

critical issues from three distinct perspectives (i.e. police officer, senior manager and

external stakeholder). Other strengths relate to the strong theoretical framework that guides

and informs the research. There are also some identified limitations, including the

subjective nature of self-report data as well as the potential for bias by the author, which

was controlled for using a range of initiatives. A further limitation concerns the potential

for transferability and generalisability of the findings to other locations given the distinctive

nature of the BCD. These limitations and issues of transferability are dealt with at length in

the thesis.

Despite a growing body of literature about contextual harms associated with alcohol,

and specific research concerning police intervention in such contextual harms, there is still

much to learn. While research on the subject of police engaging in alcohol-related

incidents has focused on police behaviours and strategies in response to such issues, there is

a paucity of research that focuses on the knowledge and understanding of officers engaged

in such behaviours and practices. Given the scarcity of research dealing with the

knowledge, skills and attitudes of police officers responding to harms inside and outside

viii

licensed premises, this research contributes significantly to what is a recent and growing

body of research and literature in the field.

The research makes a practical contribution to police agencies’ understanding of

officer knowledge and police practice in ways that have the potential to shape education

and training agendas, policy approaches around generalist versus specialist policing,

strategic and operational strategy, as well as partnership engagements. The research also

makes a theoretical contribution given that the research design is informed by the Three

Circle Public Value Model and the results are analysed through the lens of the

aforementioned model. This research also makes the case for further research in this

important domain. Such research could focus on, but not be limited to, issues associated

with increased skill and knowledge development of officers. If this research did occur then

it would also be useful to test for any effects on increased engagement and migration of

knowledge from specialist to generalist police and to test the resultant impacts, if any, on

harm reduction and enforcement outcomes.

This research is therefore unique, given its comprehensiveness and originality in

bringing together a range of inter-related research questions around police knowledge, and

their beliefs, skills and behaviours when policing licensed premises. It provides an

important basis for police agencies to consider their future commitment to activities

associated with the policing of licensed premises in an effort to enhance public safety.

ix

TABLE OF CONTENTS

KEY WORDS ...............................................................................................................................I

ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................ II

TABLE OF CONTENTS........................................................................................................... IX

LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................ XIV

LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................................XV

LIST OF APPENDICES........................................................................................................XVII

ACRONYMS AND TERMS................................................................................................ XVIII

STATEMENT OF ORIGINAL AUTHORSHIP......................................................................XX

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS....................................................................................................... XXI

CAVEAT ................................................................................................................................XXII

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION TO THE THESIS ........................................................... 1

1.1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 2

1.2 THE RESEARCH AREA ........................................................................................................... 2

1.3 RATIONALE FOR THE RESEARCH ........................................................................................... 3

1.4 RESEARCH AIMS AND OBJECTIVES ........................................................................................ 4

1.5 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ................................................................................................. 5

1.6 SCOPE OF RESEARCH ............................................................................................................ 7

1.7 THESIS OUTLINE ................................................................................................................... 7

1.8 SUMMARY............................................................................................................................ 8

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW........................................................................... 10

2.1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 11

2.2 ALCOHOL MARKETS AND CONSUMPTION ............................................................................ 11

2.2.1 Overview of drinking trends and patterns ............................................................ 12 2.2.2 Shifting attitudes to strategies to address alcohol harms....................................... 13 2.2.3 Demographic changes and alcohol consumption.................................................. 14

2.3 HARMS ASSOCIATED WITH ALCOHOL USE ........................................................................... 15

2.3.1 Health harms....................................................................................................... 15 2.3.2 Social harms ....................................................................................................... 16 2.3.3 Alcohol and other drugs relationship ................................................................... 18

2.4 THE LICENSED PREMISES ENVIRONMENT............................................................................. 19

2.4.1 Policing licensed premises .................................................................................. 19 2.4.2 Problematic licensed premises............................................................................. 21 2.4.3 The physical design of licensed premises ............................................................ 22 2.4.4 Management of licensed premises ....................................................................... 25 2.4.5 Profitability versus risk reduction – the legislative foundation ............................. 28

x

2.5 EFFECTIVE HARM-REDUCTION STRATEGIES FOR LICENSED PREMISES .................................. 29

2.5.1 Responsible serving practices.............................................................................. 29 2.5.2 Reducing alcohol promotion, marketing practices and incentives......................... 30 2.5.3 Restricting late night licences.............................................................................. 30

2.6 ALCOHOL AND POLICE........................................................................................................ 31

2.6.1 Determinants of role............................................................................................ 31 2.6.2 Alcohol-related incidents and police attendance .................................................. 32 2.6.3 Alcohol and crime relationship............................................................................ 33 2.6.4 Police knowledge and attitudes relating to alcohol policy .................................... 35 2.6.5 Police response styles.......................................................................................... 37 2.6.6 Officer characteristics and attitudes - Enforcement styles .................................... 38 2.6.7 Randomised enforcement – The Torquay Experiment.......................................... 39

2.7 THE AUTHORITY TO POLICE LICENSED PREMISES................................................................. 41

2.7.1 Legislative requirements ..................................................................................... 41 2.7.2 Vision, mission and authority to regulate licensed premises................................. 42

2.8 RESEARCH GAPS AND LIMITATIONS .................................................................................... 46

2.9 RESEARCH QUESTIONS ....................................................................................................... 46

2.10 SUMMARY.......................................................................................................................... 48

CHAPTER THREE: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK......................................................... 50

3.1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 51

3.2 POLICE AGENCY-FOCUSED THEORIES.................................................................................. 51

3.3 LICENSED PREMISES-FOCUSED THEORIES............................................................................ 54

3.4 INDIVIDUAL-FOCUSED THEORIES ........................................................................................ 57

3.5 SOCIETY-FOCUSED THEORIES ............................................................................................. 60

3.6 LINKING THEORY TO RESEARCH QUESTIONS ....................................................................... 63

3.7 THREE CIRCLE PUBLIC VALUE MODEL............................................................................... 67

3.7.1 Public value ........................................................................................................ 68 3.7.2 Authorising environment..................................................................................... 69 3.7.3 Operational capability ......................................................................................... 70

3.8 RELEVANCE OF THE MODEL TO THE PROGRAM OF RESEARCH.............................................. 70

3.9 SUMMARY.......................................................................................................................... 72

CHAPTER FOUR: RESEARCH SETTING & STRATEGY .................................................. 74

4.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 75

4.2 CHARACTERISTICS OF BRISBANE CENTRAL DISTRICT (BCD).............................................. 75

4.2.1 Organisational structure of the QPS and BCD ..................................................... 76 4.2.2 Personnel in BCD ............................................................................................... 76 4.2.3 Residential and visitor populations ...................................................................... 76 4.2.4 Number and types of licensed premises ............................................................... 77 4.2.5 Number of patrons in licensed premises .............................................................. 78 4.2.6 Offences prosecuted............................................................................................ 78

xi

4.2.7 Liquor Enforcement and Proactive Strategies (LEAPS) ....................................... 79 4.2.8 3 a.m. lockout provisions .................................................................................... 80 4.2.9 Valley Liquor Accord (VLA) .............................................................................. 81 4.2.10 Drink Safe Precinct (DSP) Pilot .......................................................................... 81

4.3 INTEGRATION OF THE STUDIES INTO THE MODEL................................................................. 82

4.4 RESEARCH STRATEGY ........................................................................................................ 83

4.4.1 Study One – Police practitioners ......................................................................... 84 4.4.2 Study Two – Police management ........................................................................ 85 4.4.3 Study Three – External stakeholders.................................................................... 85

4.5 SUMMARY.......................................................................................................................... 86

CHAPTER FIVE (STUDY ONE): POLICE PRACTICE, KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEFS IN

POLICING LICENSED PREMISES........................................................................................ 88

5.1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 89

5.2 RESEARCH QUESTIONS ....................................................................................................... 89

5.3 METHOD ............................................................................................................................ 90

5.3.1 Ethical clearance................................................................................................. 90 5.3.2 Participants ......................................................................................................... 91 5.3.3 Procedure............................................................................................................ 92 5.3.4 Materials............................................................................................................. 92 5.3.5 Data analysis....................................................................................................... 95

5.4 RESULTS ............................................................................................................................ 96

5.4.1 Police practice..................................................................................................... 96 5.4.2 Police knowledge.............................................................................................. 104 5.4.3 Police beliefs .................................................................................................... 111 5.4.4 Police strategy................................................................................................... 118 5.4.5 Skill levels and training..................................................................................... 119 5.4.6 Barriers and impediments.................................................................................. 124

5.5 DISCUSSION ..................................................................................................................... 131

5.6 SUMMARY........................................................................................................................ 139

CHAPTER SIX (STUDY TWO): QUALITATIVE RESEARCH WITH POLICE

EXECUTIVE ........................................................................................................................... 141

6.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 142

6.2 OBJECTIVE ....................................................................................................................... 142

6.3 METHOD .......................................................................................................................... 143

6.3.1 Ethical clearance............................................................................................... 143 6.3.2 Participants ....................................................................................................... 144 6.3.3 Procedure.......................................................................................................... 145 6.3.4 Materials........................................................................................................... 146 6.3.5 Data analysis..................................................................................................... 147

xii

6.4 RESULTS .......................................................................................................................... 147

6.4.1 Understanding the QPS role .............................................................................. 147 6.4.2 Officer understanding of their role..................................................................... 149 6.4.3 Queensland Government’s expectation.............................................................. 149 6.4.4 QPS expectation of officers............................................................................... 151 6.4.5 Personal vision and communication of vision .................................................... 152 6.4.6 Knowledge, skills and attitude to effect role ...................................................... 154 6.4.7 Capacity of officers to impact on harm reduction............................................... 156 6.4.8 Barriers to effective harm-reduction .................................................................. 157 6.4.9 Further opportunities to impact positively upon harm-reduction ........................ 159 6.4.10 Identification and impact of partners in harm reduction ..................................... 161

6.5 DISCUSSION ..................................................................................................................... 163

6.6 SUMMARY........................................................................................................................ 167

CHAPTER SEVEN (STUDY THREE): QUALITATIVE RESEARCH WITH EXTERNAL

STAKEHOLDERS................................................................................................................... 168

7.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 169

7.2 OBJECTIVE ....................................................................................................................... 169

7.3 METHOD .......................................................................................................................... 169

7.3.1 Ethical clearance............................................................................................... 169 7.3.2 Participants ....................................................................................................... 170 7.3.3 Procedure.......................................................................................................... 170 7.3.4 External reliability and validity process............................................................. 173 7.3.5 Materials........................................................................................................... 173 7.3.6 Data analysis..................................................................................................... 175

7.4 RESULTS .......................................................................................................................... 175

7.4.1 Understanding the QPS role .............................................................................. 175 7.4.2 Officer understanding of their role..................................................................... 176 7.4.3 Queensland Government’s expectation.............................................................. 178 7.4.4 QPS expectation of officers............................................................................... 181 7.4.5 Personal vision and communication of vision .................................................... 182 7.4.6 Knowledge, skills and attitude to effect role ...................................................... 185 7.4.7 Capacity of officers to impact on harm reduction............................................... 186 7.4.8 Barriers to effective harm reduction .................................................................. 187 7.4.9 Further opportunities to impact positively upon harm-reduction ........................ 190 7.4.10 Identification and impact of partners in harm reduction ..................................... 191

7.5 DISCUSSION ..................................................................................................................... 195

7.6 SUMMARY........................................................................................................................ 199

CHAPTER EIGHT: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION .................................................... 201

8.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 202

8.2 OVERVIEW OF THE STUDIES, METHODOLOGY AND KEY FINDINGS...................................... 203

8.2.1 Beliefs relevant to licensed premises ................................................................. 204 8.2.2 Practice inside and outside licensed premises .................................................... 207 8.2.3 Knowledge, skill levels, capability and implications for policing activities ........ 210

xiii

8.2.4 Identified barriers to policing ............................................................................ 212 8.2.5 Factors predictive of entering licensed premises. ............................................... 214 8.2.6 Study Two – Senior officer attitudes and beliefs................................................ 214 8.2.7 Study Three – External stakeholder’s attitudes of police role and performance .. 218

8.3 IMPLICATIONS FOR POLICE AND THE POLICING OF LICENSED PREMISES ............................. 221

8.4 RECOMMENDATIONS TO POLICE ORGANISATIONS ............................................................. 223

8.5 CONTRIBUTIONS TO RESEARCH......................................................................................... 227

8.6 STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS OF THE RESEARCH............................................................. 231

8.6.1 Strengths of the research.......................................................................................... 231 8.6.2 Limitations of the research....................................................................................... 232

8.7 SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH.............................................................................. 234

8.8 CONCLUSION.................................................................................................................... 235

REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................ 237

APPENDICES.......................................................................................................................... 255

xiv

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Map of Brisbane Central District.................................................................................. 3

Figure 2: Policy frameworks and drivers ................................................................................... 43

Figure 3: Theoretical frameworks matrix................................................................................... 51

Figure 4: Three Circle Public Value Model ............................................................................... 67

Figure 5: Relevance of studies to the Three Circle Public Value Model ..................................... 83

Figure 6: Self-identified prosecution of Liquor Act offences in BCD....................................... 102

Figure 7: Perception by police of responsibility for the Liquor Act .......................................... 116

Figure 8: Perception of level of training on response to licensed premises ............................... 123

Figure 9: Officer-identified sources of training to police licensed premises.............................. 124

Figure 10: Perception of powers to manage incidents concerning licensed premises ................ 126

xv

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 The environment of licensed premises and impacts on alcohol-related harms.... 24

Table 2 Liquor license types in Brisbane Central District .............................................. 77

Table 3 Selected crimes in Brisbane Central District compared to State 2003-10........... 79

Table 4 Demographic profile of sample ........................................................................ 91

Table 5 Mean scores for age and experience of the sample............................................ 92

Table 6 Frequency of attendance inside and outside licensed premises .......................... 97

Table 7 Frequency of attendance inside and outside licensed premises by rank.............. 98

Table 8 Proportion of incidents initiated by rank........................................................... 99

Table 9 Proportion of incidents responded to by mode of initiation ............................... 99

Table 10 Proportion of incidents responded to by other means by rank.......................... 100

Table 11 Frequency of officers involved in Liquor Act enforcement operations ............ 103

Table 12 Frequency of use of specified strategies.......................................................... 104

Table 13 Level of officer knowledge of effective strategies by rank .............................. 105

Table 14 Level of officer knowledge of effective strategies by job role ......................... 105

Table 15 Level of officer knowledge of the Liquor Act................................................. 106

Table 16 Strategies identified by officers as effective in reducing harm......................... 106

Table 17 Knowledge of strategies in policing outside licensed premises by rank ........... 107

Table 18 Knowledge of strategies of policing outside licensed premises by role............ 108

Table 19 Strategies identified by officers as effective in reducing harm......................... 108

Table 20 Origins of officer knowledge to police inside licensed premises. .................... 109

Table 21 Origins of officer knowledge to police outside licensed premises.................... 110

Table 22 Proportion of incidents that involve alcohol.................................................... 111

Table 23 Perceptions of alcohol involvement based on incident .................................... 112

Table 24 Perceptions of complexity and difficulty in responding by offence type.......... 113

Table 25 Perceptions of difficulty in responding to incidents by location ...................... 113

Table 26 Perceptions of contextual factors and difficulty of managing incidents ........... 114

Table 27 Degree of difficulty and reasons in managing issues....................................... 115

Table 28 Police perceptions of effectiveness of partners/stakeholders ........................... 117

Table 29 Officer perception of effectiveness of 3a.m. lockout provisions ...................... 117

Table 30 Perceptions of effectiveness of strategies to reduce harm................................ 119

Table 31 Officer perception of importance of skills....................................................... 120

Table 32 Perception of officer skills to police licensed premises ................................... 121

Table 33 Perception of level of training to respond to incidents..................................... 122

xvi

Table: 34 Perception of police powers to manage incidents............................................ 125

Table 35 Extent of constraint of factors in policing licensed premises ........................... 127

Table 36 Perceived barriers/obstacles to policing licensed premises .............................. 128

Table 37 Factors that would need to occur to encourage officer attention ...................... 129

Table 38 Logistic regression for policing incidents inside licensed premises ................. 131

Table 39 Rank and position of QPS personnel interviewed ........................................... 144

Table 40 Participant understanding of the QPS role in licensed premises ...................... 148

Table 41 Participant understanding of the QPS expectation of officers .......................... 152

Table 42 Participant personal vision ............................................................................. 153

Table 43 Participant perception of officer knowledge, skill and attitudes....................... 156

Table 44 Participant perception of barriers.................................................................... 159

Table 45 Strategies officers should use ......................................................................... 161

Table 46 Perceived effectiveness of stakeholders .......................................................... 162

Table 47 Personnel interviewed .................................................................................... 170

Table 48 Participant understanding of the QPS role in licensed premises ...................... 176

Table 49 Participant understanding of officer role in licensed premises......................... 178

Table 50 Participant understanding of the government’s expectation............................. 180

Table 51 Participant understanding of the QPS expectation of officers .......................... 182

Table 52 Participant personal vision ............................................................................. 184

Table 53 Participant perception of officer knowledge, skill and attitudes....................... 186

Table 54 Participant perception of barriers.................................................................... 189

Table 55 Strategies officers should use ......................................................................... 191

Table 56 Perceived effectiveness of stakeholders .......................................................... 194

xvii

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1: Survey questionnaire (Study One) ....................................................................... 256

Appendix 2: Questionnaire and table of data instrument and sources ....................................... 280

Appendix 3: Internal QPS interview script (Study Two) .......................................................... 280

Appendix 4: Information sheet for internal QPS interviews (Study Two)................................. 280

Appendix 5: External stakeholder interview script (Study Three)............................................. 284

Appendix 6: Information sheet for external stakeholder interviews (Study Three).................... 280

Appendix 7: Twenty-five techniques of situational crime prevention ....................................... 288

xviii

ACRONYMS AND TERMS

ABS Australian Bureau of Statistics

BCC Brisbane City Council

BCD Brisbane Central District

CBD Central Business District

CCTV Closed Circuit Television

CDSU Central District Support Unit

CIB Criminal Investigation Bureau

COAG Council of Australian Governments

COMPSTAT Computer Driven Crime Statistics

CPIU Child Protection Investigation Unit

CPTED Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design

DANZP Directions in Australia New Zealand Policing

DUMA Drug Use Monitoring Australia

DSP Drink Safe Precinct

LEAPS Liquor Enforcement and Proactive Strategies

MCDS Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy

MNR Metropolitan North Region

NDSHS National Drug Strategy Household Survey

NHMRC National Health and Medical Research Council

OLGR Office of Liquor and Gaming Regulation

OPR Operational Performance Review

POP Problem-Oriented Policing

xix

POPP Problem-Oriented and Partnership Policing

PSAA Police Service Administration Act (1990)

QAS Queensland Ambulance Service

QDCC Queensland Drug Coordinating Committee

QFRA Queensland Fire & Rescue Authority

QHA Queensland Hotel Association

QPS Queensland Police Service

QUT Queensland University of Technology

RBS Responsible Beverage Service

RBT Random Breath Testing

RQ Research Questions

RSA Responsible Service of Alcohol

RTD Ready to Drink

SEP Safer Entertainment Precinct

SETON Self Enforcing Ticketable Offence Notice

TCS Tactical Crime Squad

VAMP Valley Alcohol Management Program

VLA Valley Liquor Accord

xx

STATEMENT OF ORIGINAL AUTHORSHIP

The work contained in this thesis has not been previously submitted for a degree or

diploma at any other higher education institution. To the best of my knowledge and belief,

the thesis contains no material previously published or written by another person except

where due reference is made.

Signed: _____________________________________________________________

Date: _______________________________

xxi

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

It is traditional that PhD theses acknowledge those that have assisted in the process.

Such acknowledgement recognises that, in many cases, others have lent their support along

the PhD journey. In my case, I have had significant support from a broad range of people

and I want to thank them most sincerely.

I wish to thank Professor Jeremy Davey, Drs Angela Wallace, James Freeman and

Gavan Palk – my colleagues from the Centre for Accident Research and Road Safety

Queensland, Queensland University of Technology (QUT) – who have provided invaluable

technical and academic advice and support.

I want to thank all police officers who participated in this research, including those

members of the senior executive of the Queensland Police Service (QPS). I acknowledge

the contribution of the management team at Brisbane Central District (BCD), QPS, in this

process. I particularly acknowledge police within the BCD who are deserving of special

praise for the way in which they go about their policing duties in a difficult and challenging

context.

I also acknowledge contribution of those external to the Service who assisted in this

research. I also wish to thank those individuals who provided logistical, administrative and

practical assistance, as well as their personal support. I am also grateful to the National

Drug Strategy Law Enforcement Funding Committee for their practical assistance.

Importantly, I wish to thank my wife, Kristine and children, Nathan, Andrew and

Isabella, who supported me during this protracted body of work.

For all of this support, I am most grateful.

xxii

CAVEAT

The views and opinions expressed in this thesis are those of the author and should in

no way be construed as representing those of the Queensland Police Service or the

Queensland Government.

1

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION TO THE THESIS

1.1 Introduction …………………………………………… 2

1.2 The research area ……………………………………... 2

1.3 Rationale for the research …………………………….. 3

1.4 Research aims and objectives ………………………… 4

1.5 Theoretical framework ……………………………….. 5

1.6 Scope of research ……………………………………... 7

1.7 Thesis outline …………………………………………. 7

1.8 Summary ……………………………………………… 8

2

1.1 Introduction

Alcohol consumption is enmeshed within Australian culture (Palk, 2008) and its

use and misuse contributes to considerable health and social harms (Barbor et al., 2010;

English et al., 1995; Gutjahr et al., 2001; Palk, 2008; Steenkamp et al., 2002). In terms

of the settings where alcohol is consumed, it is reported that approximately one-third of

all alcohol is consumed within licensed premises (Lang et al., 1992). While there is

more contemporary research dealing with alcohol consumption in particular settings,

there is no known research on the subject of the quantum of alcohol consumed on

licensed premises. The harms, particularly related to violence, have been associated

with particular licensed premises operating in the night-time economy (Briscoe &

Donnelly 2001b; Chikritzhs et al., 1997; Homel et al., 1991; Stockwell, 1997).

Police have a significant role in not only responding to the manifestation of

harms, such as crime, injuries, assaults, domestic violence, stealing, and sexual assault,

but they also have a significant opportunity to prevent problems and thereby reduce

alcohol and other drug-related harm (Doherty & Roche, 2003). Given the amount of

alcohol consumption within licensed premises, the nature and extent of the harms, as

well as the lack of opportunity to influence outcomes in other settings (e.g. private

residences), licensed premises offer police and other stakeholders the opportunity to

influence positively the reduction of the myriad of harms associated with alcohol

consumption.

Accordingly, there is a need to better understand police officer knowledge and

skill levels regarding the policing of incidents inside and outside licensed premises. It is

also important to understand the strategies implemented by police to address alcohol-

related incidents. Furthermore, there is a great need to investigate the barriers which

serve to discourage or dissuade officers from engaging in such policing activities.

This thesis documents a program of research undertaken for this purpose.

1.2 The research area

This program of research is centred on a dynamic police district in south-east

Queensland, Brisbane Central District (BCD). The research is focused on policing

within the Brisbane central business district and the adjacent Fortitude Valley area, both

of which are located in BCD (refer to Figure 1). Together these areas pose significant

challenges for police, particularly in terms of alcohol-related harms. Such harms are

3

exacerbated by the significant number of licensed premises and the high numbers of

clientele who frequent this area for the express purpose of recreating in licensed

premises. Considering that the Fortitude Valley area is one of the world’s few declared

‘entertainment precincts’, with over 500 licensed premises within approximately 20

km2, this is both a valuable and unique area for research.

Figure 1: Map of Brisbane Central District

Source: Queensland Police Service 2012

1.3 Rationale for the research

The relevant literature, particularly Australian, has addressed issues associated

with alcohol-related harm, focusing on violence and antisocial behaviour at licensed

premises. Research has also previously focused on the extent of involvement of police

in a range of contexts, many of which are strongly correlated with alcohol misuse.

There are a number of reasons why this current research is important.

4

First, there is limited research relating specifically to the knowledge and skill

levels of police and their ability, as assessed by the officers themselves, to respond to

alcohol-related incidents both inside and outside licensed premises. The limited

research that does exist is dated.

Second, police officers have considerable opportunity to intervene at licensed

premises and thereby prevent offences, which, in turn, enhances public safety.

Therefore, this research has the potential to directly impact public safety outcomes by

enhancing officer skills, knowledge and abilities to respond to alcohol-related harm.

Third, there is a need to better understand the factors that prevent police from, or

serve as barriers to, policing licensed premises. The limited research that does exist

alludes to various barriers that potentially exist and thereby discourage police from

engaging with licensed premises. However, this has not been investigated in any recent

or comprehensive manner.

Fourth, there is a need to understand the perspectives of both senior police and

external stakeholders when policing licensed premises. The views of senior police are

strongly influential in setting the strategic and operational direction for the policing

effort. The views of external stakeholders, on the other hand, are important in

developing an appreciation and awareness of the level of engagement and potential

impacts of policing around licensed premises. To the knowledge of the author, the

approach taken in this research, which is to examine the views of operational police,

senior officers and external stakeholders, has not been used previously. It is this

approach that makes this research unique.

1.4 Research aims and objectives

A broad aim of the research is to determine, from the perspective of police

officers and non-police stakeholders, which strategies they perceive as being effective in

policing licensed premises. A further key aim is to determine if police officers have a

clear understanding of the nature of the strategies that they determine are effective in

policing licensed premises, as well as whether they employ these strategies and what

factors limit the use of these strategies.

The objective of Study One is to examine the attitudes, values and beliefs of

operational police officers who have a role in the policing of licensed premises. The

research will examine what strategies police officers currently employ and importantly,

5

develop an understanding of what barriers and limitations prevent them achieving

optimum operational effectiveness.

The objective of Study Two is to examine the attitudes, values and beliefs of

senior police with respect to the policing of licensed premises within the BCD. The

views of these officers are considered within the context of the organisational areas in

which they operate, namely district, regional and corporate levels of the police service.

The beliefs of senior officers regarding the efficiency and effectiveness of police both

inside and outside licensed premises are examined. In particular, perceptions of

policing practice from the perspective of operational and strategic policy setting and

practice are examined.

The objective of Study Three is to examine the understanding of the police role in

the policing of licensed premises from the perspective of external industry stakeholders.

It also investigates the nature and extent of interaction between police and this group of

stakeholders. The stakeholders’ perceptions of policing practices are examined as well

as their beliefs in terms of effective strategies that are capable of being deployed by

police in addressing alcohol-related harm. This study identifies the operational

partnerships that exist within the BCD and explores the nature, function and

effectiveness of the partnership between police and stakeholders in the regulation of

licensed premises.

1.5 Theoretical framework

Identifying and applying relevant theory is important in gaining an in-depth

understanding of the issues relevant to policing licensed premises. This examination of

theory also facilitates an appreciation of what has been done historically to address what

are significant social problems associated with alcohol. The literature and theories that

underpin such research are important considerations in explaining the developing body

of knowledge in a particular discipline. This research builds on previous research that

has occurred in fields such as psychology, anthropology, sociology and criminology,

with respect to issues pertaining to policing, crime and alcohol use. Particularly with

respect to Study One, the work of Findlay, Sheehan, Davey, Brodie, and Rynne (2000,

2002) as well as K. L. Smith, Wiggers, Considine, Daly, and Collins (2001) has

demonstrated relevance to the current research, and is reviewed. Theories of alcohol-

6

related crime, violence and antisocial behaviour are also identified and considered and

will assist in the analysis and interpretation of data.

There are a range of theories and models that can be used to describe various

aspects of police interactions at licensed premises. Some of these describe and explain

the behaviour of the individual alcohol consumer and their response to alcohol, and in

particular, the individual’s propensity for violence and antisocial behaviour, for

example, Psychological Disinhibition Hypothesis (Bushman, 1997; Kallmen &

Gustafson, 1998) and Expectancy and Arousal Models of Aggression (Bushman, 1997;

Bushman & Cooper, 1990; Exum, 2006). Others describe the interaction between the

licensed premises and the patron through the design of the premises, distribution

strategy of alcohol and management of the premises generally, for example, Crime

Prevention Through Environmental Design (Doherty & Roche, 2003) and Place Based

Theory (Jochelson, 2007; Weisburd, 2008; Braga & Weisburd, 2009), or examine the

role of police and the styles of policing that are employed to effectively regulate such

environments, for example, Police Enforcement Styles (Brown & Willis, 1985; J. Q.

Wilson, 1968; Wortley & Homel, 1995), Third Party Policing (Mazerolle & Ransley,

2005), and Problem Oriented and Partnership Policing (Prenzler & Sarre, 2009).

One model encompasses the three studies which together make up the overall

program of research. This model has been described by Moore (1995) and has been

further refined by Alford (2000), and is otherwise described below as the Three Circle

Public Value Model. The three elements of the model relate to (1) public value, (2)

authorising environment, and (3) operational capability. These three key components of

the model are described and analysed within the context of their individual impacts on

the model as a whole. Alford (2000) argues that strategic management theory has a

number of facets that are constructed around three main elements. These are as follows:

the value produced or purposes pursued by the organisation (public value), the

environment in which the organisation operates (authorising environment), and the

resources and capabilities with which value is created or purposes are pursued

(operational capability) (Alford, 2000).

Chapter Three specifically examines the Three Circle Public Value Model and

reviews the theories that have been used to inform the research.

7

1.6 Scope of research

This thesis examines the knowledge, skills, beliefs and barriers for operational

police, their senior managers and external stakeholders associated with the policing of

licensed premises. The research is focused predominately at the police officer level;

however, the attitudes and views of senior officers and external stakeholders are also

identified and analysed. Examination of the actual nature and extent of police officer

training is not within the current scope of this research. Although this program of

research does not examine the actual resource allocation to officers employed in the

policing of licensed premises, it does, however, examine officer perceptions of

resourcing appropriated for such policing purposes. The views of stakeholders external

to the police, who had some involvement in the management of, or response to,

incidents at licensed premises, provides valuable contextual background throughout this

research. Involving these external stakeholders adds a novel value to the research

findings.

1.7 Thesis outline

This program of research is believed by the author to be the first research to

examine the role of police in policing licensed premises, particularly from the

perspective of the individual officer, senior officers and external stakeholders.

Additionally, it is the first known comprehensive research of its kind comparing officer

knowledge, self-identified skill levels and corresponding strategies which officers

implement to address alcohol-related harm inside and outside licensed premises.

The structure of the thesis, outlined below, reflects the specific tasks undertaken

as part of the program of research.

• Chapter Two reviews the available literature and will consolidate the available

research evidence and identify gaps in current knowledge and pose the relevant

research questions relating to this body of research.

• Chapter Three identifies, reviews and applies relevant theory to the research aims

and objectives.

• Chapter Four outlines the research setting, particularly in terms of those factors that

make BCD unique from a policing and research perspective.

• Chapter Five describes the research strategy and study methods used in the present

investigation.

8

• Chapter Six describes the issues associated with police practice, knowledge and

beliefs when responding to alcohol-related incidents both inside and outside

licensed premises within BCD. This chapter also examines the strategies officers

use to reduce alcohol-related harm, officer skill levels and corresponding levels of

training, officer knowledge and the source of such knowledge, attitudes to

partnerships, and barriers to police engaging with licensed premises.

• Chapter Seven explores a key research hypothesis: that senior officers are influential

in setting the strategic and operational direction when it comes to the policing of

licensed premises. This chapter further examines the methodology and findings of

Study Two relating to the experience and beliefs of senior police managers with

respect to influencing the knowledge, skills and attitudes of operational police

relevant to the policing of licensed premises within BCD.

• Chapter Eight examines the methodology and findings of Study Three relating to

external industry stakeholders’ understanding of the police role in the policing of

licensed premises. It examines issues such as the nature and level of interaction

with police, perceptions of policing practice, beliefs in terms of effective strategies

employed by police, and the attitude to partnership arrangements with police and

other stakeholders.

• Chapter Nine provides an overview of the studies, and discusses the key findings

emanating from the research. It also identifies the strengths and limitations of the

research, suggests future research and makes recommendations to industry.

1.8 Summary

This chapter has provided an overview of the program of research as well as the

rationale for the research. The background issues which relate to the theoretical context

of the research have also been outlined. The research setting, BCD, has been researched

and identified as an important location within Queensland in which to examine the

phenomena of policing licensed premises. BCD includes the Brisbane City CBD and

Fortitude Valley area. Their vibrant, buoyant and geographically concentrated night-

time economy provides a useful location for research.

The next chapter (Chapter Two) will examine the available literature relevant to

the policing of alcohol-related incidents, particularly those in licensed premises. This

review will focus on the extent of alcohol consumption, the settings in which alcohol is

9

consumed and the harms associated with such activity. In particular, the challenges for

police in this difficult area will be a major focus of the literature review. This will lay

the foundation for further chapters outlining the analysis of research findings.

10

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction …………………………………………………… 11

2.2 Alcohol markets and consumption ……………………………. 11

2.3 Harms associated with alcohol use ……………………………. 15

2.4 The licensed premises environment …………………………... 19

2.5 Effective harm-reduction strategies for licensed premises …… 29

2.6 Alcohol and police ……………………………………………. 31

2.7 The authority to police licensed premises …………………….. 41

2.8 Research gaps and limitations ………………………………… 46

2.9 Research questions ……………………………………………. 46

2.10 Summary ……………………………………………………… 48

11

2.1 Introduction

Although there is an extensive body of literature on the subject of alcohol and

licensed premises, there is limited research on police knowledge of, skills for, and

attitudes to the policing of licensed premises. The research which does exist will be

identified and discussed.

This chapter reviews the relevant literature relating to alcohol use and harms in

Australian society. First, the extent of alcohol consumption is explored followed by a

review of the literature concerning the harms associated with the use and misuse of

alcohol. The literature will be discussed in the context of the provision of alcohol in the

licensed premises setting. The strategies which are regarded as being effective in

addressing alcohol-related harm inside and outside licensed premises will be analysed.

This literature review will also examine and discuss the policing aspects of alcohol-

related crime, violence and antisocial behaviour.

Among the key questions that are explored in this literature review are: How

prevalent is alcohol consumption within Australian society, what is the extent of harms

associated with the consumption of alcohol, and what are the specific and unique issues

associated with the provision of alcohol in the licensed premises setting as it impacts

policing of such premises? The research also examines the roles and opportunities for

police in addressing the harms associated with alcohol use and misuse both inside and

outside licensed premises.

The aim of this chapter is to consolidate the available research evidence and

identify gaps in current knowledge relating to policing licensed premises. This Chapter

will examine these gaps and pose a series of research questions and objectives that will

guide the research. This review will lay a foundation for the subsequent program of

research that is undertaken for this thesis.

2.2 Alcohol markets and consumption

It is not the fact that alcohol is consumed that poses such significant challenges

for police. It is the range of factors associated with such consumption that impact

police; for example, the extent of consumption, the settings in which that alcohol is

consumed; and the impact of the intoxicated person’s actions on themselves and others.

These issues are important areas for discussion and examination.

12

2.2.1 Overview of drinking trends and patterns

Australians consume significant levels of alcohol on a per capita basis. The most

recent reliable data on Australian consumption of alcohol and other drugs comes from

the National Drug Strategy Household Survey (NDSHS). Between 1991 and 2010 the

pattern of alcohol consumption has declined marginally (from 8.1% in 2007 to 7.2% in

2010) for Australians aged 14 years and over. Approximately 7 in every 100 (7.2%)

Australians aged 14 years and older consume alcohol on a daily basis (Australian

Institute of Health and Welfare [AIHW], 2011). Between 1993 and 2007, the

proportion of people who drank alcohol on a weekly basis fluctuated. In 2007, four out

of ten (41.3%) Australians aged 14 years and over drank weekly and in 2010 that figure

had decreased slightly to 39.5%. Interestingly, the proportion of ex-drinkers has

declined from 1991 (12%) to 2010 (7.4%), while those in the community who have

never consumed alcohol similarly increased from 1991 (6.5%) to 2010 (12.1%) (AIHW,

2011).

Alcohol consumption differs markedly between males and females. Almost

twice as many males (9.6%) are likely to drink daily than females (4.9%), and males

(45.2%) were more likely than females (33.9%) to drink weekly (AIHW, 2011).

Overall, one in five people in Australia aged 14 years or older consumed alcohol at a

level that puts them at risk of harm from disease or injury over the course of their

lifetime (AIHW, 2011). Males (53.1%) are at a significantly higher risk than females

(28.1%) for lifetime risk of alcohol-related harm (AIHW, 2011). There are potential

risks to health from a single occasion of drinking alcohol. In 2010, around two in five

(39.8%) people aged 14 years or older who drank at least once in the previous 12

months had consumed at levels that put them at risk of alcohol-related injury (AIHW,

2011). Paradoxically, while the proportion of risky drinkers decreased in 2010, the

number of single occasion at-risk drinkers in Australia increased (from 7.1 million in

2007 to 7.3 million in 2010) (AIHW, 2011). Males (50.0%) were more likely than

females (29.8%) to put themselves at risk from single occasion consumption of alcohol

(AIHW, 2011).

The proportion of the population who used alcohol daily increased with age, with

the most prevalent daily consumers being 70 years and over (14.8%). In comparison,

the largest number of less-than-weekly drinkers was among teenagers (18–19 years)

(AIHW, 2011). Almost half (45.9%) of all teenagers (14–19 years) consumed alcohol

less than weekly. Fewer than one in five (18.2%) teenagers (14–19 years) consumed

13

alcohol weekly and fewer than 1 in 100 (0.5%) drank alcohol daily (AIHW, 2011).

More male teenagers (21.1%) consumed alcohol weekly compared with females

(15.1%) (AIHW, 2011). Some 81.2% of Australians over the age of 14 had used

alcohol in the 12 months preceding the survey, an increase from 77.9% in 1993 (AIHW,

2004, 2011).

Alcohol was the drug most commonly used, with almost 90% of the population

aged 14 years and over having tried alcohol (AIHW, 2008). For alcohol, the age of

initiation has remained relatively stable since 1993 at 17 years (AIHW, 2008). In terms

of availability, nine out of ten (89.3%) Australians aged 14 years or older had access to

or been offered alcohol. Alcohol availability remained relatively stable between 2001

and 2008.

Community attitudes to drugs are both complex and varied. The drug of most

harm is not necessarily the drug that the community may identify when thinking about

the ‘drug problem’. The NDSHS 2011 data reveals that only 1 in 15 (6.5%) of

Australians aged 14 years and over named alcohol as the drug that they thought of when

people thought of the drug problem. This had decreased from 10.5% in 2007 (AIHW,

2011). The other drugs more likely to be perceived as problematic were heroin

(31.0%), marijuana/cannabis (23.9%) and methamphetamine (16.3%) (AIHW, 2011).

Alcohol is therefore perceived to be less harmful than other (illicit) drugs. Regular use

of alcohol was considered acceptable by nearly one-half (45.1%) of Australians aged 14

years and over in 2010. This figure (45.1%) was dramatically higher in previous years,

namely 2004 (77.0%) and 2001 (74.7%) (AIHW, 2004, 2011).

Although the NDSHS historically, represents the most comprehensive alcohol

using patterns across Australia there are significant limitations with the data. These

issues can include: potential bias and non response rates; poor accounting of total

alcohol consumed; as well as other issues.

2.2.2 Shifting attitudes to strategies to address alcohol harms

As the individual drinker’s attitudes and practices have changed over time, so too

have the Australian community’s attitudes and acceptance of strategies to address

alcohol and other drug-related harm. There are a range of strategies which potentially

address alcohol-related harm and these can be subject to differing levels of public

support. The NDSHS 2008 data identified public acceptance of various strategies,

14

reporting that the highest levels of support are for more severe penalties for drink-

driving (86.3%) and stricter laws against serving drunken customers (83.3%). Strict

monitoring of late night licensed premises was also a strategy with strong community

support (75.2%). The least supported strategies identified by the community were

increasing the price of alcohol (24.1%), reducing the number of outlets that sell liquor

(32.2%), and reducing the trading times for pubs and clubs (38.9%) (AIHW, 2008).

2.2.3 Demographic changes and alcohol consumption

The NDSHS identified the settings in which alcohol was being consumed in

Australia and concluded that levels of consumption occurred in different settings,

depending on the age of the drinker (AIHW, 2008). For example, a person aged 20–29

years, irrespective of their gender, is far more likely to consume alcohol at a pub, club

or wine bar than are people aged 40 years and over. Conversely, a person aged 40 years

and over is far more likely to consume alcohol in their own home than is a person

within younger age groups (AIHW, 2008).

In terms of alcohol consumption, it is not only the settings that change over time

but also the demographics of the drinker and the nature of the beverages consumed.

One alcohol consuming sub-group that has attracted considerable social and media

commentary is young people, particularly young women. There is a considerable

amount of research that suggests that binge drinking among young adults increased over

time (Carey, 2002; Davey, Davey, & Obst, 2002; Johnston, O’Malley, & Bachman,

1996; Presley, Leichliter, & Meilman, 1999). Jonas, Dobson, and Brown (2000)

suggest that when young Australian women consume alcohol they generally do so by

engaging in binge behaviours.

Jersild (2002) reports that young teenage girls are four times more likely to drink

alcohol than their mothers were. The rise in women’s drinking, the early age of

drinking onset and the binge drinking behaviours, have created commercial markets for

a range of ‘innovative’ alcohol-based products. The National Drug and Alcohol

Research Centre has found that more than 40% of 12–15 year olds first tried alcohol in

commercially made pre-mixed drinks (Fitzgerald & Jordan, 2009). These products,

sometimes referred to as RTDs (ready-to-drink) or alcopops (spirits mixed with fruit

juices), have attracted a strong following and are increasing in popularity compared

with other alcoholic drinks (Fitzgerald & Jordan, 2009). The manufacture, marketing

15

and availability of such products is problematic from the perspective of public health

and policing intoxication. Such products disguise or mask the taste of alcohol and

therefore may encourage drinking to excess (Doherty & Roche, 2003).

The RTD phenomenon has caused considerable discussion at the community

level and within government. The Council of Australian Governments (COAG), as part

of the Binge Drinking Strategy, was asked by responsible Ministers, to consider calling

on the industry to stop producing RTD beverages that combine energy drinks with

alcohol, reduce the alcohol content of RTDs, and stop using masking agents such as

sweeteners. These characteristics of RTDs are perceived to lead to early introduction to

and use of alcohol to young people (Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy [MCDS],

2009).

2.3 Harms associated with alcohol use

There can be social benefits occasioned with alcohol use; however, there are

quite obvious health and social harms also linked with the consumption of alcohol,

particularly when it is misused or occurs in risky settings and contexts. This makes

alcohol research such a complex and vexed issue to examine.

2.3.1 Health harms

Epidemiological research involving individual level, population level, aggregate,

and case-control studies around alcohol use, has established that excessive consumption

of alcohol is linked to serious health and social harms (AIHW, 2000, 2002; Barbor et

al., 2010; English et al., 1995; Gutjahr et al., 2001; National Health and Medical

Research Council [NHMRC], 2001; Palk, 2008; Steenkamp et al., 2002). The alcohol

and disease link is well established and suggests that alcohol plays a causal role in a

number of diseases, not least of which are cirrhosis of the liver, coronary heart disease

(CHD) and some forms of cancer (English et al., 1995; Palk, 2008; Rehm et al., 2003).

This is not withstanding the fact that low to moderate consumption of alcohol (defined

as 1–2 drinks per day) can have some protective effect, in people older than 40 years,

against mortality from ischemic heart disease and ischemic stroke (Agarwal, 2002;

Barbor et al., 2010; Chadwick & Goode, 1998; Carrao, Rubbiati, Bagnardi, Zambon, &

Poikolaninen, 2000; Palk, 2008; Puddy, Rakic, Dimmitt, & Beilin, 1999; Single et al.,

1999). The cardio-protective effects mentioned have not generally been observed in

16

aggregate studies and there is research which indicates that even small amounts of

alcohol may increase the risk of both breast cancer (Coutelle et al., 2004; Hamajima et

al., 2002) and colorectal cancer (Ferrari et al., 2007).

Harms associated with the consumption of alcohol can also include injuries due

to intoxication, diseases contracted through unsafe sex and needle sharing, and alcohol

poisoning leading to hospitalisation. As previously discussed (refer to 2.2.1), risk

associated with alcohol-related harm can take the form of lifetime risk and single use

risk. In terms of the NDSHS 2011 results, there was little change in the proportion of

risky drinkers from 2007 (20.3%) to 2010 (20.1%). More than 3.7 million people in

Australia aged 14 years or older were at risk of an alcohol-related disease or injury over

their lifetime based on the drinking patterns in 2010. This has increased from 3.5

million in 2007 (AIHW, 2011). Males (29.0%) were twice as likely as females (11.3%)

to drink alcohol in quantities that put them at risk of incurring an alcohol-related

chronic disease or injury over their lifetime (AIHW, 2011).

In terms of alcohol-related harm attributed to single drinking occasions, it is

worth noting that the proportion of risky drinkers declined from 41.5% in 2007 to

39.7% in 2010. Paradoxically, the number of people in Australia consuming alcohol on

a single occasion in quantities that placed them at risk of an alcohol-related injury

increased (from 7.1 million in 2007 to 7.3 million in 2010) (AIHW, 2011). It is of

concern that one in six (15.9%) people aged 14 years or older put themselves at risk of

an alcohol-related injury from a single drinking occasion at least once a week. Again,

males (50.0%) were far more likely than females (29.8%) to drink alcohol in quantities

that placed them at risk from a single occasion of drinking. Males (23.2%) were also

more likely to engage in risky single occasion drinking on a weekly basis than females

were (8.8%) (AIHW, 2011).

2.3.2 Social harms

Alcohol, tobacco and illicit drug use contributes to significant levels of illness,

disease, injury, workplace issues, violence, crime, and family and relationship problems

in Australia (MCDS, 2004). The direct costs to the Australian community from illicit

and licit drugs for 1998–1999 were estimated at $34.5B. Alcohol was associated with

approximately $7.59B in social costs for that period (Collins & Lapsley, 2002). Some

of the significant harms associated with acute levels of alcohol use include road

17

fatalities including pedestrian injuries and drink driving related crashes, drownings,

suicides, work accidents, crimes and violence, family dysfunction leading to domestic

violence, public disorder and antisocial behaviour (Barbor et al., 2010; Boles & Miotto,

2003; Bryant & Williams, 2000; Chikritzhs et al., 1999; Sinha & Easton, 1999;

Steenkamp et al., 2002; Williams, 1999, 2000).

Driving a motor vehicle either under the influence of alcohol (12.1%) or other

drugs (2.9%) was identified as being potentially the most harmful activity, from a given

list of activities (AIHW, 2008). Other potentially harmful activities related to verbal

abuse (5.7%), swimming after drinking (5.2%), working after drinking (e.g.

compromised job performance and/or safety) (4.0%), and creating a public disturbance

or nuisance (2.9%) (AIHW, 2008). Males were more likely than females to undertake

activities regarded as being harmful while under the influence of alcohol (AIHW, 2008).

Although the proportion of the population 14 years or over who had driven a motor

vehicle while under the influence had increased from 2001 (12.8%) to 2004 (13.4%), it

decreased in 2007 (12.1%). Males (16.2%) were more than twice as likely to drive as

females (8.0%) whilst under the influence (AIHW, 2008). Males (7.4%) were also

twice as likely as females (4.1%) to abuse someone while under the influence of alcohol

(AIHW, 2008).

It is estimated that 4.4 million people were victims (14 years or over) of alcohol-

related verbal abuse, 2.3 million people were ‘put in fear’, and more than three-quarters

of a million people were physically abused as a direct or indirect consequence of

alcohol consumption (AIHW, 2008). In particular, more men than women were

verbally or physically abused and more females than males were ‘put in fear’ (AIHW,

2008). Approximately 5% of all Australians suffered a non-self-inflicted injury as a

result of alcohol or other drug incidents. The most frequent injury was bruising or

minor abrasions, and males and females were equally likely to sustain such injuries.

Approximately one-third (37.7%) of all those physically abused sustained no physical

injury (AIHW, 2008).

Alcohol plays a significant role in the work that police officers engage in. It is

difficult to identify precisely the extent that alcohol impacts on police time given that

policing agencies do not routinely record the involvement of alcohol in all incidents

leading to various police responses (Doherty & Roche, 2003). This is also the case in

Queensland. While the facility exists to record an alcohol-related involvement in a call

for service, officers may be unwilling or unable to record such details because of their

18

inability to accurately diagnose alcohol as a relevant factor in the police–citizen

encounter.

Some studies which attempted to identify the relationship between alcohol and

different offence types that police routinely respond to (e.g. Arro, Crook, & Fenlon,

1992; Ireland & Thommeny, 1993; Jeffs & Saunders, 1983). To highlight this

connection between alcohol and offence types, a New South Wales study found that

alcohol was involved in 62% of all police attendances. In terms of types of offences,

alcohol was involved in 73% of assaults, 77% of street offences and 40% of domestic

violence matters (Ireland & Thommeny, 1993). In a Queensland study conducted in

1992, alcohol was identified as a factor in 25% of all police attendances, and was linked

to serious assaults (82.4%), assaults (45.9%), street disturbances (62.8%), noise

complaints (46%), domestic disturbances (53.3%), suicides (63.6%) and stealing with

violence (66.7%) (Arro et al., 1992). The Drug Use Monitoring Australia (DUMA)

program, which conducts urinalysis on inmates in police watchhouses, reports that 50%

of those detained for disorder and violent offences had consumed alcohol in the 48

hours prior to arrest (Adams et al., 2008). A USA report indicated that 36% of

convicted offenders reported alcohol use at the time of their offence (Greenfield, 1998).

2.3.3 Alcohol and other drugs relationship

Alcohol is clearly Australia’s drug of choice, followed by tobacco (AIHW, 2008).

However, in terms of illicit drug use almost two in every five Australians (38.1%) aged

14 years or older have used illicit drugs in their lives. Research clearly indicates a

strong correlation between alcohol and offending (Bartholomew, 1985; Greenfield,

1998; Pernanen, Cousineau, Brochu, & Sun, 2002). There is also a correlation between

alcohol and other drug use and offending behaviours. The DUMA program reports a

considerable overlap between heavy use of alcohol and illicit drug use. These results

indicate that three-quarters of male detainees and two-thirds of female detainees self-

reported heavy alcohol use (defined as more than five drinks for men and more than

three drinks for women in one day) in the past year. Half of male and one-third of

female detainees had drunk heavily in the 48 hour period prior to arrest. Interestingly,

of those adult detainees who reported heavy drinking in the past 30 days and in the 48

hours prior to arrest, 65% tested positive to at least one drug and 23% tested positive to

two or more drugs (Adams et al., 2008).

19

Licensed venues, including hotels and nightclubs, are locations associated with

use of illicit drugs by patrons as well as the sale and supply of such substances (Graham

& Homel, 2008). Police operations focused on disrupting illicit drug use and supply at

times conduct intelligence-based targeting of a specific licensed premises. However,

operations conducted both inside and outside licensed premises can be problematic

given the environmental features of the licensed premises, crowd numbers, patron level

of intoxication (from both alcohol and drugs), and the permissiveness of employees

within such premises. Permissiveness of employees refers to the degree of tolerance of

those that are involved in the management of licensed premises, particularly around

serving practices to the point of intoxication and non-compliance with the responsible

serving practices as specified in legislation. QPS strategic intelligence assessments

support the popular belief that illicit drug suppliers target licensed premises as

environments conducive to unlawful supply. Commercial considerations such as an

available and ready market, the demographics of the customer base, and an environment

conducive to use can be regarded as strong economic and practical drivers in the sale of

illicit drugs. The use of illicit drugs within a licensed premises therefore has an obvious

link to the sale and consumption of alcohol.

2.4 The licensed premises environment

Australians consume significant amounts of alcohol and a large amount of such

alcohol consumption is done within licensed premises. The health and social harms

associated with alcohol misuse can be considerable, both at the individual and societal

levels. The settings associated with alcohol supply and consumption are important

considerations in the effort to reduce alcohol-related harm. Given the correlation

between alcohol consumption and crime, violence and antisocial behaviour, it is

important to investigate the literature relevant to the settings in which that alcohol is

dispensed and consumed.

2.4.1 Policing licensed premises

Licensed premises within Australia are large in terms of number and diverse in

terms of their geographical spread. In 2008, there was reported to be approximately

17,000 licensed premises, which includes pubs, taverns, bars, hotels or similar premises

(Nicholas, 2010). As at 14 June, 2011, there were reported to be 7029 licensed

20

premises in Queensland, approximately 41% of the nation’s licensed premises. This is

despite the fact that in 2009 Queensland had only 19.6% of Australia’s population

(Australian Bureau of Statistics [ABS], 2010).

The popularity and role of alcohol in mainstream Australian society has led to a

proliferation of licensed premises (e.g. 9,000 licensed premises in Australia in 1999

increased to 17,000 in 2008) (ABS, 2010; Nicholas, 2010). This proliferation increased

further in the early 1990s with the loosening of trade restrictions, a strategy that

witnessed ‘free trade’ become more popular than harm reduction (Doherty & Roche,

2003), meaning that the profitability of the industry was more important, from the

perspective of government, than a policy approach (e.g. restrictive sale strategies)

addressing alcohol-related harms. The traditional local ‘pub’ (public hotel) has given

way in many cases to large entertainment venues providing a combination of

entertainment, food sales and off-premises sales (bottle shops).

Changes to legislation and social attitudes regarding drink-driving have changed

the way alcohol is purchased and consumed. These and other factors have resulted in a

change in licensed premises and created opportunities for alcohol sales businesses to

move into mixed commercial outlets such as shopping centres. Most contemporary

licensed premises are now more diverse in terms of the nature of the enterprise and the

type of premises from which alcohol is sold.

In many areas around Australia, a number of licensed premises are situated in

close proximity to others. This creates a ‘precinct’ effect, which causes patrons to

congregate in certain areas. Subsequently, this precinct generates challenges for the

licensed premise, in terms of competition, as well as for police, in terms of managing

such precincts. In many cases, such precincts have led to the establishment of

‘voluntary’ liquor accords. These aim to ensure that licensed premises are being

managed and run in accordance with minimum standards aimed at harm reduction,

while still enhancing profitability of participating venues. This has enabled

participating premises to market themselves as civically responsible by addressing

community concerns over public safety and amenity.

In Queensland, as in other jurisdictions, public amenity is an important

consideration when granting a liquor licence, or modifying the conditions of such a

licence. The impact that trade at licensed premises has on surrounding land use and

local residents in particular, is increasingly under of scrutiny (Doherty & Roche, 2003).

The police role with respect to new applications or modifications to existing liquor

21

licensing applications is to provide advice to the OLGR on public amenity grounds. In

fact, in the vast majority of cases the only objection that can be launched against the

modification of an existing licence is based on public amenity grounds. The police role

is therefore one of collecting evidence with which to support an objection on such

grounds. These grounds can include, but are not limited to, the nature and extent of

assaults, the nature and extent of calls to police to attend disturbances at premises, the

types of breaches detected by police, observable facts which suggest premises are not

subscribing to philosophies of harm reduction, and complaints from members of the

public regarding noise.

Hotels are locations strongly correlated with assault-related incidents. The type

of premises, the hours such premises trade, and proximity to other premises are all

relevant factors in determining the extent to which offences occur at this type of

premise. Australian research has found that the vast majority of assaults occur in a

reasonably small proportion of licensed premises (nightclubs, hotels and other premises)

which have extended trading hours (Briscoe & Donnelly 2001b; Chikritzhs et al., 1997;

Homel et al., 1991; Stockwell, 1997). To highlight this point, in New South Wales the

analysis of police recorded assaults over a two-year period (July 1998–June 2000)

identified that in the inner Sydney area, 12% of licensed premises accounted for 60% of

assaults. In Newcastle and Wollongong, 8% and 6% of licensed premises were

responsible for 78% and 67% of all assaults respectively (Briscoe & Donnelly, 2001a,

2003). Again these assaults were found to occur in premises which sold alcohol and

traded late, and occurred predominately late at night or in the early hours of the

morning, and at weekends. However, it should be noted that the majority of licensed

premises pose little problem in terms of violence and antisocial behaviour and do not

detract in terms of public amenity.

2.4.2 Problematic licensed premises

The vast majority of assaults occur either inside or outside a small number of

licensed premises that have extended trading hours (Briscoe & Donnelly 2001ab;

Chikritzhs et al., 1997; Homel et al., 1991; Stockwell, 1997). Furthermore, assaults are

strongly correlated with time of the day (higher propensity late at night and early hours

of the morning) as well as the day of the week (weekends are particularly problematic)

(Graham, West, & Wells, 2001; Homel & Clark, 1994; Lang, Stockwell, Rydon, &

22

Lockwood, 1995; Marsh & Kirby, 1992; Martin, Wyllie, & Casswell, 1992; Tomsen,

1997). In particular, premises which predominately target young males are more likely

to be over-represented in offences involving crime, violence and antisocial behaviour

(Homel & Clark, 1994; Homel, McIlwain, & Carvolth, 2004; Macintyre & Homel,

1997).

Numerous other studies, particularly observational studies, have identified a

broad range of other factors which increase risk of disorder, aggressive behaviour and

assaults. These factors include overcrowding, irresponsible service of alcohol, cheap

liquor promotions, inadequate staff training, poor entertainment, and permissive

attitudes to violence and sexual harassment (Graham, LaRocque, Yetman, Ross, &

Guistra, 1980; Graham et al., 2001; Homel & Clark, 1994; Leonard, Quigley, & Collins,

2003).

These studies have revealed that within licensed premises, bar areas, dance floors,

corridors and exits are over-represented, whilst outside licensed premises, parking lots,

areas near exits and footpaths feature (Graham et al., 2001; Homel et al., 1991; Lang et

al., 1995; Marsh & Kirby, 1992; Martin et al., 1992; Tomsen, 1997). The literature

supports the argument that most incidents involving aggression by patrons within the

licensed premises occur between people who are unknown to each other, after midnight,

and coincide with the premises closing (Briscoe & Donnelly 2001b; Chikritzhs et al.,

1997; Homel et al., 1991; Stockwell, 1997). In instances where there is aggressive

behaviour by patrons, most incidents involve males under 25 years of age and the causal

factors are recorded as being the following: conflict with staff, violating bar rules,

offensive behaviour, overcrowding, limited bar access, lack of food, and conflict over

interpersonal relationships (Homel & Clark, 1994; Homel et al., 2004; Macintyre &

Homel, 1997). A number of studies have also focused on the design of licensed

premises and areas outside licensed premises where violence among patrons can occur.

2.4.3 The physical design of licensed premises

Not only are there certain premises that are problematic from the perspective of

being over-represented in acts of violence or aggression, but there are specific

characteristics of the built environment which contribute to unsafe customer behaviours.

There is extensive research on the physical environment of licensed premises and their

surroundings (environs), and the impact the physical environment has upon individual

23

and group behaviours which lead to alcohol-related harms (Cameron, 2000; Doherty &

Roche, 2003; Graham et al., 1998, 2000; Homel et al., 1992; Lang & Rumbold, 1997;

McMurran, 1999; Murgraff, Parrott, & Bennet, 1999; Parks & Zetes-Zanatta, 1999;

Shepherd, 1998; Tomsen, 1989, 1997).

One of the key research questions relates to the barriers which serve to

discourage officers from policing licensed premises. It is assumed that officers do not

regard all licensed premises as having the same relative risk and that one of the factors

which discourages officers from engagement is the degree that officers can undertake

their duty in such premises with safety. Numerous publications have reiterated the

importance of environmental risks in drinking establishments (Doherty & Roche, 2003;

Graham & Homel, 1997; Hadfield, 2006; MCM Research, 1993). This has already been

discussed briefly in this chapter. Addressing the environmental risks has been a

common feature in programs designed to reduce alcohol-related violence (Graham,

Osgood, Wells, & Stockwell, 2006; Hauritz, Homel, McIlwain, Burrows, & Townsley,

1998; Homel, Hauritz, Wortley, McIlwain, & Carvolth, 1997; Wiggers et al., 2004).

However, evaluation of the impact of specific changes to the drinking environment on

reductions in violence is limited (Graham & Homel, 2008).

The literature identified that a significant level of violence which occurs within

problematic licensed premises occurs more often in specific places such as corridors,

serving bars, dance areas, near exits, outside in the carparks, and on the footpath

(Graham et al., 2001; Homel et al., 1991; Lang et al., 1995; Marsh & Kirby, 1992;

Martin et al., 1992; Tomsen, 1997). The physical design of the licensed premises has a

significant impact on alcohol-related harm. Overcrowding, dirty and unkempt premises,

loud and aggressive music, lighting and furniture design and location of bathrooms are

all factors exacerbating violence.

The challenge for those responsible for designing the licensed drinking

environment of the future is to incorporate best practice design principles, guided by

crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) philosophies, in such a way

as to meet a number of needs. These needs include reducing, wherever possible, points

of intersection between patrons; using structural efficiency; enhancing amenity; and

creating welcoming environments. Graham and Homel (2008) argue that there are

consistent patterns linking violence to the licensed premises environment and that

although the environment is a powerful controller of patron behaviour, there is still a

dearth of understanding on the capacity for environmental modifications to have a

24

positive impact on violence within the licensed premises. Factors shown to be effective

in reducing alcohol-related harm are shown in Table 1 below.

Table 1: Environmental, regulatory and other factors impacting licensed

premises Physical Environment Factors Regulatory Factors

Crowding Intoxication

Entertainment Police activities and responses

Lighting Enforcement of legislation

Seating Drink promotions

Bar location Social & cultural mix of patrons

Bar size (dimensions) Patron type (age, gender)

Drink containers Permissive attitudes of staff

Ventilation Attitudes re drunken behaviour

Air-conditioning Licensed venue policies and practices

Entrances and exits Crowd controller/door staff behaviour and practices

Cleanliness Bar staff behaviour and practices

Physical hazards Management practices and responses

Provision of food

Internal

Rubbish bins Visibility of police

Location and number of taxi ranks Communication between security personnel and police

Location of bus facilities Behaviour of licensed premises security staff

Cleanliness of outside environment Behaviour and attitude of police

Design of city, town or entertainment centre where premises located

Enforcement activities of police

Number of licensed venues Type of licensed premises (mix)

Density of licensed venues Enforcement of legislation

Operating hours of licensed venues Regulatory partnerships

Lighting

CCTV

Location of fast food outlets

External

Proximity of licensed premises to domestic premises

Source: Adapted from Doherty & Roche (2003)

Police officer safety, and for that matter public safety, are dependent upon police

officers having situational awareness of the geographical layout of particular licensed

premises. However, police also need to have knowledge of the specific regulatory

conditions under which the particular licensed premises are operating. Not all parts of

the licensed premises are subject to the same regulatory regime and it naturally follows

that officers need to know the complex regulatory regime. Issues such as the hours of

operation, number of security providers, types of drinking receptacles, number of

patrons, provision of meals, types of entertainment, and other factors, can add to the

challenge of policing particular premises.

25

Just as knowledge of the internal design is necessary, so too is knowledge of the

external environs or geographical areas immediately outside a licensed premises.

Knowledge of the built environment is often described by police as ‘situational

awareness’. Alcohol-fuelled behaviour, which has its genesis within the licensed

premises, spills out into surrounding areas. Sexual acts with consenting and non-

consenting partners, assaults, drunkenness leading to unconsciousness, public urination,

indecent behaviour generally, illicit drug dealing and secondary sales to minors are just

some of the acts that can occur outside licensed premises that require a law enforcement

response. Although security providers and licensed premises management have a

responsibility for premises that they represent, actions of individuals which adversely

affect the amenity of the surrounding area are increasingly used by police to launch

licence objections.

2.4.4 Management of licensed premises

The quality and style of management occurring at licensed premises is identified

as the single most important situational factor impacting upon alcohol-related violence

(Arnold & Laidler, 1994). Doherty and Roche (2003) have identified the characteristics

of effective management of licensed premises. These involve visible and accessible

staff, sufficient numbers of staff (particularly management and security) to manage

problems, and proactive staff who encourage patrons to seek assistance. Licensed

premises which have a reputation for low tolerance for violent, obnoxious and

threatening behaviour and that are seen to be responsive to such issues are regarded as

being safer premises to visit, and are more likely to attract females and couples.

Internal policies or ‘in-house policies’ are important in defining behaviours deemed

unacceptable. Naturally, the existence of a policy without the corresponding

commitment of all stakeholders involved in the management and facilitation of the

licensed premises is unlikely to change behaviours for the better. Clear policies which

are well communicated and rigorously enforced send consistent and unambiguous

messages. Security providers and managers who develop professional partnering

relationships with police and who self-report criminal and antisocial behaviours develop

reputations for having well managed premises.

26

The manner in which alcohol is consumed can also contribute to harm. As an

example, drinking in ‘shouts’ increases the quantum of alcohol consumed and the harms

associated with such practice (Homel & Clark, 1994). Promotional strategies which

focus on selling cut-priced alcohol or volume sales are appealing to a segment of the

community, usually the young. The young are vulnerable to such strategies and the

risks to them are potentially greatest, which explains the focus on prohibiting such

practices through licence conditions and legislative provisions in the Liquor Act.

Access to cheap or free water, sale of non-alcohol or low alcohol drinks are all effective

strategies for reducing intoxication. It would seem however, that young people are

attracted to inexpensive high alcohol content drinks (Doherty & Roche, 2003).

The provision of food and entertainment is an important consideration in

reducing alcohol-related harm. The availability of food is associated with reduced risk

of aggression (Graham et al., 1980) because the consumption of food slows down

alcohol absorption. Perhaps there is also the tendency when consuming food either to

consume less alcohol or consume alcohol at a slower rate. Boredom of patrons is also

associated with aggression (Doherty & Roche, 2003). Strategies such as the provision

of live or recorded music, video games and televised sporting matches can reduce

aggression (Homel & Tomsen, 1993). However, not all entertainment offers a calming

effect and licensed premises need to be mindful of the type of entertainment and the

likely consequences associated with it.

The incidence and severity of alcohol-related problems in licensed premises and

their environs are linked to particular features of the licensed premises environment

(Doherty & Roche, 2003). These features are identified as follows: high concentration

of people; crowd congestion; services that do not cater for demand; physical hazards

arising from type and placement of furniture; lighting that facilitates deviance and

increases anonymity; and insufficient and unclean toilets (Doherty & Roche, 2003).

Overcrowding in licensed premises can lead to accidental contact. When loud

music and other sensory deprivation is combined with an individual’s diminished

capacity to resolve conflict through verbal negotiations, this can lead to hostility and

sometimes aggression (Briscoe & Donnelly, 2001a; Doherty & Roche, 2003; Graham et

al., 1998, 2000; Hauritz et al., 1998; Homel et al., 1991, 1992; Homel & Clark, 1994;

Macintyre & Homel, 1994, 1997). Patron discomfort leads to increased alcohol

consumption to ameliorate the effects of the discomfort (Doherty & Roche, 2003).

27

In Australia, patron numbers are determined for particular premises by local

governments and conditions are imposed on licenses based on the maximum numbers of

patrons allowed in particular premises. Management adherence to maximum numbers

is important for a variety of reasons, including facilitating safe and orderly evacuation in

times of fire and other emergency situations circumstances, as well as ensuring that

deviant behaviour and over intoxication of patrons is not occurring. In the latter case, it

is extremely difficult to enforce provisions against intoxication where patron numbers

exceed the capacity of crowd controllers. Where overcrowding occurs, other offences

are more likely to occur such as underage purchase and consumption of alcohol on

premises. Furthermore, pressure on bar staff to meet client needs is likely to lead to

greater opportunity for minors to be supplied alcohol, which in turn increases the risk of

detection of licensing offences for the premises (Doherty & Roche, 2003).

Private security providers have a key role to play in ensuring that strategies to

control patron numbers are in place and that enforcement of maximum patron levels

occurs. Best practice with respect to these security providers dictates that not only must

they concentrate on problems or potential for problems which could occur within

licensed premises, but they must also maintain vigilance in the environs around such

premises. In terms of civil litigation and complaints by residents and police about

public amenity issues, management must be vigilant to prevent or at least minimise

alcohol-related issues on the periphery of the licensed premises.

Effective management of licensed premises is predicated upon a number of

people and factors. It is internal management of licensed premises and external

enforcement (e.g. police officers operating in the environments predominately outside

such premises) which creates significant opportunities to address alcohol-related

problems (Hauritz et al., 1998). Just as management, security providers, bar staff and

other employees have a role to play in terms of the profitability of the premises, so too

do they have a role with respect to reducing alcohol-related harms. It is accepted

however, that the police role with respect to reducing harms inside licensed premises

extends beyond enforcing the external environment. Police have a significant role in

ensuring ensure that the internal management are meeting their legal obligations.

28

2.4.5 Profitability versus risk reduction – the legislative foundation

In Australia, legislation applicable to licensed premises has moved towards

incorporating philosophies consistent with harm minimisation. This legislation

generally complies with government operating philosophies which are consistent with

the National Drug Strategy 2010–2015. A major plank in this national approach to

alcohol and other drugs is the concept of ‘harm minimisation’. Harm minimisation is an

approach which aims to reduce the harmful consequences of use of both licit and illicit

drugs. Harm minimisation is one of a number of major policy approaches, including

demand reduction and supply reduction, which underpin Australia’s overall policy for

dealing with the drug problem.

The Liquor Act 1992 (Qld) [the Act] outlines the objects of the Act as … ‘(a)

Regulate the liquor industry in a way compatible with minimising harm caused by

alcohol abuse and misuse...’ (Section 3). The Act provides examples of harm such as

adverse effects on a person’s health, personal injury, property damage, and violent or

antisocial behaviour. The Act [Section 3(a)] identifies a tension that exists not only

within the Act but also within the industry generally. That tension relates to the need to

be profitable while minimising harms. This is highlighted at Section 3(b) which

indicates that the object of the Act is to “facilitate and regulate the optimum

development of the tourist, liquor and hospitality industries of the State having regard to

the welfare, needs and interests of the community and the economic implications of

change.” A further example of such conflicting forces is identified at Section 3(e) which

aims to “regulate the sale and supply of liquor in particular areas to minimise harm

caused by alcohol abuse and misuse and associated violence.” Interestingly, the final

provision, Section 3(g) of the Act’s objects identifies that a fundamental premise of the

Act is to ‘provide revenue for the State to enable the attainment of this Act’s objects and

for other purposes of government’.

Clearly the Act aims to promote profitability, which adds to the revenue base of

the State, and reduction in harm to the community. The issue is whether these two

concepts are mutually exclusive, and it is open to contention that in fact these concepts

are difficult at best, or impossible at worst, to reconcile. In terms though of reducing

harms, there are a broad range of practical strategies which can be employed at the

licensed premises level to address such harm.

29

2.5 Effective harm-reduction strategies for licensed premises

This thesis focuses on police knowledge and application of strategies which are

effective in reducing alcohol-related harm. It also explores the context of police

application of these strategies by examining their attitudes to the licensed premises

environment. It is therefore relevant to this research to examine the literature from the

perspective of effective harm reduction strategies within licensed premises. To this end,

the literature identifies a number of areas which pose difficulty in terms of alcohol-

related harm, but create significant opportunities for reform. These areas include

irresponsible serving practices; alcohol promotion, marketing practices and incentives;

late-night licensing; and premises layout (Graham et al., 2000). The physical design or

layout of licensed premises has been dealt with in Section 2.4.3; however, the other

strategies are discussed below.

2.5.1 Responsible serving practices

The object of various liquor laws throughout Australia is to prevent the service of

alcohol up to and beyond the point of intoxication. The reality is, however, that in

many hotels, clubs and other venues it is not uncommon to see intoxicated patrons.

Although the service of such patrons under these circumstances leaves the individual

bar staff member and the licensee liable to prosecution, only a small proportion of

liquor act prosecutions are directed at the licensed premises or the staff member

concerned; that is most prosecutions occur at the individual consumer level as opposed

to the supplier level (Doherty & Roche, 2003). The continued service of an intoxicated

patron is a strong predictor of alcohol-related harm (Lang et al., 1995). Responsible

service of alcohol (RSA) training and quality bar staff who take their responsibilities

seriously in terms of minimising harms and risk, are important strategies in addressing

harms. The RSA, sometimes referred to in the literature as responsible beverage service

(RBS), has not focused specifically on reducing violence (Graham & Homel, 2008).

Some programs offered internationally by private consultancy firms facilitate training

for bar staff on strategies to prevent violence. However, such strategies have not been

the subject of rigorous evaluation (Graham & Homel, 2008). One such program, which

has been rigorously evaluated, is the ‘Safer Bars’ program implemented in Ontario,

Canada. This program aims to improve the communications skills (verbal, non-verbal

and presence) of the bar staff and focuses on six key areas, namely understanding how

30

aggression escalates, assessing the situation, keeping ‘cool’, understanding and using

effective body language, responding to problem situations, and legal issues (Graham &

Homel, 2008).

A relevant consideration from a law enforcement perspective is the challenge and

difficulty in defining the term ‘intoxication’. Despite relevant legislation creating

offences around serving intoxicated patrons the subjective assessment by the officer of

what constitutes intoxication poses significant challenges for individual officers as well

as legislators. This is a significant limiting factor, particularly when dealing with lower

level intoxication breaches of legislation.

2.5.2 Reducing alcohol promotion, marketing practices and incentives

The purpose of promoting alcohol is to increase its consumption (Lindsay, 2005)

and therefore profit associated with its sale. In this way, promotion and marketing

works against the concepts of harm reduction unless there is a movement of consumers

away from a hazardous form of drinking to a less hazardous form. Examples of this

may be to move a market from high alcohol content beverages to lower alcohol

products. The various liquor legislation and liquor accords in place throughout

Australia invariably aim to curtail strategies that promote the rapid consumption of

alcohol: cheap drinks, large volume drinks, drinking within compressed timeframes

(e.g. happy hour activities), and promotion of drinking to the young. In a recent study

(Mallick & Banfield, 2007) it was identified that promotions offering a free t-shirt after

purchasing eight beers were associated with high levels of patron intoxication within the

premises. Other research also identified a correlation between higher levels of binge

drinking and lower prices for a single drink or volume drink (e.g. jug of alcohol) (Kuo,

Wechsler, Greenberg, & Lee, 2003).

Research indicates that effective strategies to reduce the rapid consumption of

alcohol associated with drink promotions include either eliminating the drink promotion

or increasing the length of the promotion timeframe to encourage slower, more

reasonably paced drinking (Mallick & Banfield, 2007).

2.5.3 Restricting late night licences

Studies have confirmed that the vast majority of assaults seem to occur either

inside or outside a small number of licensed premises that have extended trading hours

31

(Briscoe & Donnelly, 2001b; Chikritzhs et al., 1997; Homel et al., 1991; Stockwell,

1997). As has been stated previously, a New South Wales study analysed police

recorded assaults over a two year period and found that in inner Sydney, 12% of

licensed premises accounted for 60% of assaults, while in Newcastle and Wollongong,

8% and 6% of licensed premises were responsible for 78% and 67% of all assaults

respectively (Briscoe & Donnelly, 2001a, 2003). Chikritzhs and Stockwell (2002)

found that the increased consumption of alcohol is correlated with the extended length

of time available for drinking.

A recent longitudinal study of restrictions to opening hours in Diadema, Brazil

found a significant decline in homicides when hours of operation were more restricted.

The study found that initially the law allowed 24-hour sale of alcohol, but when sales

were prohibited between the hours of 11 p.m. and 6 a.m. this policy change lead to

reductions in homicides (e.g. a reduction of 9 homicides per month) (Duailibi et al.,

2007).

2.6 Alcohol and police

2.6.1 Determinants of role

Defining a precise and finite role for police in terms of addressing alcohol-related

harm is a difficult undertaking. This is particularly so within the context of the police

role in policing licensed premises. There are a number of reasons for this, including the

diversity of sources which define roles and expectations as well as the conflicting

expectations of police in regard to this aspect of their role.

Police officers operate with an original authority consistent with a concept known

as the ‘Office of Constable’. This authority provides independence from inappropriate

political pressure. This independence, however, does not take into account the levels of

authority (senior police) that exist within a police agency that direct an officer’s duties,

nor does it have regard for legitimate political influence such as changes in public

policy practice. While the authority for senior officers to provide direction to more

junior officers originates from both law (e.g. Police Service Administration Act 1990

[Q’ld]) and service policy and procedures, other pressures for police to engage in

certain situations can come from the media, political and pressure groups, other

government agencies and the business sector. The individual officer also has the ability

to determine their role in a given situation provided that such response is supported by

32

legislation and service policy. Within these complex frameworks, officers have

discretion to operate, depending upon the context, with some autonomy.

A further limitation in attempting to precisely define the police role is that this

role is not static and has significant degrees of variability over time. Even within the

stakeholders groups previously mentioned, their expectations of police can change.

This is particularly the case in terms of the political pressures upon the police role.

Significant public policy changes, which result in legislative or regulatory change, can

lead to considerable departures from routine or traditional police practice and increase

demands on officers. This is true within the policing licensed premises context where

changes to licence conditions, operating hours, conditions of trading, and licensing

arrangements for premises and employees (e.g. security providers) can and do occur.

One example is the 3 a.m. lock-out provisions, introduced to Queensland on 1 July 2006

to address the phenomenon of patrons migrating from one premises to another,

particularly after being excluded because of antisocial behaviour and/or intoxication.

This policy change led to new strategies in the way that officers engage in the policing

of both licensed premises and public space management.

2.6.2 Alcohol-related incidents and police attendance

Alcohol and its impact on safety, social disruption and violence are issues of

significant concern to communities in Australia (Doherty & Roche, 2003; Graham et al.,

1998, 2000; Homel et al., 1992; Lang & Rumbold, 1997; Pernanen, 1998). There has

been significant and unwavering attention paid by governments to licensed premises in

Australia since the late 1990s. A growing body of research argues that licensed

premises offer a significant opportunity to disrupt crime and antisocial behaviours.

Highly publicised incidents both inside and outside licensed premises have led to

opportunities to introduce reforms to the liquor industry. An example of this is the

homicide of a young man in Brisbane, Queensland in 2005, which prompted the then

Premier to introduce a 17-point plan which included the 3 a.m. lockout provisions. The

death of this young man provided the impetus for government to bring in sweeping

reforms to the nightclub industry (Sandy, 2009).

The police are one of those agencies who, on behalf of government and

community, respond to the misuse of alcohol. There have been few studies in Australia

which quantify the proportion of alcohol-related incidents that police attend. However,

33

the link between intoxication and misuse of alcohol and the police response is well

documented. One such study conducted in Sydney, New South Wales (Ireland &

Thommeny, 1993) examined six patrols areas in terms of attendance by police at

alcohol-related incidents over a four week period in 1991. This study revealed that 62%

of incidents attended (n=684) by police were alcohol-related, and over three-quarters of

the public order offences (antisocial types of behaviour) were similarly alcohol related.

In Queensland, a similar study was centred on four police regions over a two

week period in 1991 (Arro et al., 1992). This study focused on the calls for police

assistance and then determined the proportion of such calls that were alcohol related.

Some 2,879 incidents were recorded and 27% were considered to be alcohol related. Of

particular note was the finding that around 50% of alcohol-related incidents occurred in

or within the vicinity of licensed premises. The majority of these offences occurred in

late evenings or early mornings and at weekends. Another Queensland study (Davey &

French, 1995), which was conducted over a four week period in 1994, identified that

17% of incidents requiring intervention by police were alcohol related. A later

Queensland, Australia study dentified that in 31,090 incidents requiring a police

response, 23% were alcohol related, 2% were drug related, 1% involved both alcohol

and drugs and 0.4% involved a volatile substance (e.g. paint or glue) (Palk, Davey, &

Freeman, 2007b). The analysis indicated that approximately one in four incidents

attended by police during the period under review involved alcohol.

A common phenomenon in both domestic and international research into policing

responses to alcohol-related issues, is the issue of methodological problems. These

limitations can include, but are not limited to, the subjective assessment, usually

conducted by police, in terms of an alcohol-related link or alternatively, the subjective

nature of determining whether someone is intoxicated. Studies from overseas have

relied upon self-report data which has some inherent limitations in terms of accuracy,

and caution should be exercised when using this data in any definitive sense (Palk,

Davey, & Freeman, 2007a).

2.6.3 Alcohol and crime relationship

There has been an historical view that alcohol does not cause crime, violence and

antisocial behaviour, but rather it is strongly correlated with such offending behaviours.

Despite such a view, there are some individual and aggregate level studies which

34

contradict this notion. Such studies indicate a causal relationship between alcohol

consumption and violence (Room & Rossow, 2001). The strength of this relationship

(alcohol and offending behaviours) is reported to be culturally dependent. The patterns

of alcohol consumption, and in particular drinking to intoxication, is reported to be an

important factor in ‘causing’ violence (Barbor et al., 2010). Several studies have also

reported that heavy drinkers are more likely to be not only the offenders but also the

victims of violence (Room et al., 2001; Room & Rossow, 2001).

In a 2001 Australian study, 62% of adult male prisoners reported being under the

influence of alcohol or illegal drugs at the time of their offending. As a proportion of

all detainees surveyed in this study, 29.6% of the adult male prisoners indicated that

they attributed their offending to the consumption of alcohol (Makkai & Payne, 2003).

Interestingly, these results also support other research previously undertaken in Western

Australia (42%) and New South Wales (44%) (Makkai & Payne, 2003).

In a Canadian study of prisoner populations, it was established that 38% of the

surveyed prisoners were found to have used alcohol at the time of committing their

most serious offence (Pernanen et al., 2002). A New Zealand study also found strong

alcohol involvement, reporting that almost one-third of all recorded crime in that

country involved an offender who had consumed alcohol prior to offending (Stevenson,

2009). In the wider international arena (United Kingdom, USA and Canada), alcohol

has been associated with between 40–70% of homicides, assaults and street

disturbances (Cookson, 1992; Davey & French, 1995; Dingwall, 2006; Greenfield,

1998). The literature not only identifies a strong positive correlation between offending

and alcohol consumption but also indicates a link between incarceration and alcohol

dependency. Of note, a separate New Zealand study found that 50% of prisoners

incarcerated were alcohol dependent (Bushnel & Bakker, 1997). In the USA about 40–

60% of the incarcerated population are young males who had consumed alcohol prior to

or at the time of committing the offence for which they were incarcerated (Dingwell,

2006; Greenfield, 1998; Indermaur & Upton, 1998; National Institute of Justice, 1991).

The risk of violent behaviour is unevenly distributed across a range of drinkers

and drinking events (Pernanen, 1998). Young intoxicated men are a sub-category at

greatest risk of alcohol-related harm (Graham et al., 1998; Graham, Schmidt, & Gillis,

1996; Hauritz et al., 1998; Hoaken & Phil, 2000; Homel et al., 1992; Homel & Clark,

1994; Macintyre & Homel, 1997; Rossow, Pape, & Wichstroem, 1999).

35

The settings in which alcohol is consumed and the venue location are important

factors impacting offending behaviours. Close proximity of alcohol outlets, sometimes

referred to as alcohol-outlet density, is a factor which exacerbates serious violent crime

(Day, Breetzke, Kingham, & Campbell, 2012). Research also highlights the link

between certain types of alcohol serving venues and their unique characteristics, such as

permissive attitudes of staff to rules and intoxication and geographic location (e.g. non-

metropolitan areas) as factors which exacerbate or contribute to offending behaviours

(Rowe, Wiggers, Kingsland, Nicholas, & Wolfenden, 2012).

2.6.4 Police knowledge and attitudes relating to alcohol policy

There is a paucity of research examining the experiences and perceptions of

police officers when dealing with alcohol-related incidents, particularly from the

perspective of their proficiency in handling such matters (Findlay et al., 2000). The

literature review found little published research on the subject of the knowledge and

skill levels of police responding to alcohol-related incidents.

Findlay et al. (2000) examined police activity logs and police responses to a

survey. They found that police officers experienced varying degrees of difficulty when

managing alcohol-related incidents. This research identified domestic violence as the

most difficult single incident type for police officers to manage; however, the most

difficult setting to manage, in terms of alcohol, was a licensed nightclub. Other factors

such as the presence of an ‘audience’, the involvement of aggressive people, and other

factors such as incidents involving particular minority groups, can lead to increased

difficulty in managing situations (Findlay et al., 2000). Interestingly, the study found

that rank and experience was not correlated with confidence in managing alcohol-

related situations. The research found that newer recruits were more likely to be

confident in managing nearly all situations requiring a police response, with the

exception of dealing with people with mental illness.

Research by Lang and Rumbold (1997) which compared the effectiveness of

three community-based initiatives to reduce alcohol-related violence both inside and

outside licensed premises concluded that the single most important factor in improving

conditions inside and outside licensed premises was the willingness by police to enforce

the relevant liquor laws. Enforcing the relevant legislation presupposes that police

officers have the necessary understanding of the relevant provisions of the applicable

36

legislation. However, Findlay et al. (2000) reported that only 15% of police officers

said they had a very good knowledge of liquor legislation. This study also found that

there was no consensus among officers as to who they thought should enforce the

relevant liquor provisions of the legislation, leading to a recommendation being made

that police officers should have not only a good working knowledge of the legislation,

but also that the responsibility for enforcement of the legislation should be clearly

defined.

In further research undertaken by Findlay et al. (2002) which examined police

reports of enforcement of liquor laws in both rural and urban areas of Australia, the

results showed that police direct most enforcement at individual drinkers in breach of

the law rather than at the venue that supplied the alcohol. The study identified that the

enforcement behaviour of both rural and urban officers was significantly influenced by

their self-reported knowledge of the liquor laws. In both settings those officers who

were the most likely to enforce the liquor laws against vendors or licensees where those

who claimed to have a very good knowledge of the liquor laws (Findlay et al., 2002).

This led to the researchers concluding that there is a need for improvement in police

training programmes so that officers are provided with comprehensive training in liquor

law enforcement. It was further recommended that programs ensure that officers have

the knowledge, attitudes, values and skills to fulfil liquor law enforcement duties fully

(Findlay et al., 2002).

In a study by K. L. Smith et al. (2001), police officers in New South Wales were

asked, using a questionnaire, to assess their level of skill and knowledge to deal with

alcohol-related incidents. This study is thought to be the only study that examines the

relevance of these factors as predictors of police knowledge and attitudes regarding the

enforcement of RSA laws. K. L. Smith et al. (2001) reported that one-fifth of police

reported that they were unsure of the RSA provisions of the legislation, and almost half

indicated that they did not have the skills required to monitor the responsible service

practices of licensed premises. This research also identified that only 55% of police

surveyed considered that they had sufficient skills in RSA policing. Although the

participant numbers involved in this study were not overly high (n=298) the reported

response rate was high (77%), which enhances the generalisability of the findings. But

K. L. Smith et al. (2001) identified the need for further research involving a larger

sample, to enable multivariate analysis to be undertaken so that independent

associations could be analysed and further explored.

37

2.6.5 Police response styles

The police response to any situations requiring a police presence is driven by a

range of factors, which include the role, experience, perceptions, beliefs and attitudes of

the individual officer. The expectation of an officer’s superiors, organisational

mandate, and community and government expectations also feature prominently in

decision making and the style of policing adopted.

A number of law enforcement response style models have been developed over

time based on how organisations and individuals respond to various policing situations

(Broderick, 1987; R. J. Smith & Klein, 1983; J. Q. Wilson, 1968; R. J. Wilson, 1996).

These styles, however, appear to be variations on three policing styles originally

described by J. Q. Wilson (1968). He has defined policing styles as fitting three broad

categories – ‘legalistic’, ‘watchman’ and ‘service’.

The legalistic style takes a zero or low tolerance approach to situations and

therefore arrest is the primary response to situations. When responding to situations and

in the control of crime, this style is associated with a para-military approach. Such

approaches are police-centric in terms of ‘expertise’, and engagement with the

community is purely a means to an end in furthering prosecutions. Partnerships with

the community and other agencies are not given prominence and success of such

approaches is usually measured by police hierarchy in terms of levels of crime. Police

operating within a legalistic or traditional model of crime control point to increased

powers and resources as the answer to controlling crime (R. White & Perrone, 2005).

The watchman style of policing has elements of the legalistic style, in terms of

the para-military approach; however, the approach is community-centric rather than

police-centric. Police officers at the local level engage with the community through

police–community initiatives aimed at developing crime prevention programs.

Although arrest is not incompatible with this approach, non-arrest for low level or street

offences is highly desirable (Fielding, 1995, 2005; R. White & Perrone, 2005).

A service or community policing style is difficult to define precisely and thus

many definitions exist (Seagrave, 1996). A common thread, as the term suggests, is the

partnership between the police and community with the aim of preventing crime. Crime

prevention as a concept arose in the 1980s out of perceptions of lack of police

accountability, poor relationships between the police and community, and perceptions

38

that traditional policing methods were inadequate to deal with contemporary issues

(Fielding, 2005). There are a broad range of initiatives that fall under a ‘crime

prevention’ umbrella.

While there is limited research on styles of policing generally, there is no known

research on a definitive predominant style of policing with respect to licensed premises.

In reality, the most effective policing approach or style in policing such premises can

employ all three styles (watchman, legalistic or service) depending upon the type of

premises and the nature of the problem at hand. This thesis, while examining the nature

of police responses, does not attempt to categorise such responses into one or more of

the three styles variously described as watchman, legalistic or service.

2.6.6 Officer characteristics and attitudes - Enforcement styles

Police officers have significant opportunity to exercise discretion. Arguably,

police have greater opportunity to exercise discretion than other agents within the

criminal justice system (Wortley, 2003). In fact, it is a police officer using their

discretion to take action against an individual that commences or initiates other

stakeholder action. As an example, if police did not take action against a licensee then

the OLGR would not intervene and the courts would not deal with the determination of

guilt in a particular matter. In such ways, police are the gatekeepers in terms of

activating others within the criminal justice system.

There are two schools of thought with respect to police discretion. On one hand,

discretion is seen as a flexible and enlightened way of going about policing (De Lint,

1988; Gallagher, 1979; Kinsey & Young, 1982; Wortley, 2003), and on the other, there

is concern about police deciding who is and is not worthy of prosecution (Egger &

Findlay, 1988; Goldsmith, 1990; Gottfredson & Gottfredson, 1988; Pike, 1985; Walker

1983). This latter argument, based on police determining the worth of prosecution,

infers that selective enforcement allows police to align justice to their own priorities,

which might not accord with that of the community’s (Wortley, 2003). Yet discretion is

an inevitable and necessary part of policing because a specific legislative provision

can’t, with any certainty, consider all the unique factors relevant to whether prosecution

is warranted or not.

There is limited research with respect to characteristics and attitudes of police,

specifically relating to licensed premises and policing alcohol-related situations. There

39

is, however, a body of research with respect to the personalities of police and their

performance in a range of contexts (Brown & Willis, 1985; Colman & Gorman, 1982;

Henkel, Sheehan, & Reichel, 1997; Perrot & Taylor, 1995; Wortley & Homel, 1995).

This research indicates that police responses are largely contextually based and that a

broad range of policing styles (previously discussed) are employed at the discretion of

the officer concerned, largely according to the circumstances that the officer encounters.

2.6.7 Randomised enforcement – The Torquay Experiment

The literature supports police officers engaging in the policing of licensed

premises as an effective strategy to reduce alcohol-related harm (Doherty & Roche,

2003). There is, however, a paucity of empirical research findings as to what

constitutes the definitive style of policing and the strategies police should use to

maximise this engagement, having regard for the ultimate aim which is the creation of

safer liquor-consuming environments. One exception is an initiative often described in

the literature as the ‘Torquay Experiment’, commonly referenced study which

represents an historical benchmark. Researchers (Jeffs & Saunders, 1983) conducted a

randomised enforcement experiment in the seaside resort town of Torquay, England in

the late 1970s. This experiment followed a visit in May 1978 by the seasonal Task

Force Commander and other police, who warned licensees of a new policy approach to

the policing of licensed premises. This approach involved uniformed police visiting all

licensed premises in the harbourside area considered to be potential sources of, or

targets for, public disorder (Jeffs & Saunders, 1983). Such visits by police were random

in nature, and occurred approximately two to three times a week over a five-month

period. The strategy involved a professional and friendly overt police presence in the

visited licensed premises, with police required to check for under-age drinking and

intoxicated patrons. A town in the same tourist region was used as a control site in this

experiment. In the control site, no special or unique enforcement action was taken, that

is, enforcement was no different to that which would normally have occurred.

Interestingly, an analysis of crime and public order offences in Torquay during

the intervention (1977 to 1978) compared with offences prior to the intervention,

showed a decline of approximately 20% in all arrests in Torquay. There was a return to

baseline levels of crime in 1979 after the program ended. It was reported that there was

no specific effect on the number of violent offences observed, although there was a

40

positive effect on public order offences, which had the strongest association with

alcohol (Jeffs & Saunders, 1983). It is noteworthy that the decline in arrests was

achieved despite the potential rise in overall arrests as a result of both the increased

police presence and the intervention.

Graham and Homel (2008) suggest that there are several important aspects to this

experiment, including the consideration that despite police reporting that visits required

minimal effort, there would have been a significant investment by police to ensure that

the random nature of the intervention and the unpredictability of the timing made the

intervention truly random. Visits were thorough, thereby reducing opportunities to

conceal offences, and the thoroughness and visibility created an environment where

‘good orderly conduct’ was the responsibility of both staff and patrons (Jeffs &

Saunders, 1983). Interestingly, the police in this experiment conducted themselves in

an amicable manner and were seen as cooperative because of their warnings to licensed

premises managers about the start of the new approach prior to its implementation.

Graham and Homel (2008) argue that the Torquay experiment probably worked,

albeit with a modest impact overall and apparently with little or no effect on violence.

The reason cited for this success was because it was perceived as an excellent

operationalisation of both deterrence theory and the theory of responsive regulation.

These theories will be discussed in Chapter Three. Homel (1998) argues that deterrent

effects are optimised when enforcement is unpredictable, highly visible, well publicised,

apparently ubiquitous and not able to be easily evaded by offenders.

Subsequent to the Torquay experiment, a number of replication studies occurred.

One such replication experiment occurred during 1986 and 1987 in Brighton, England.

The replication experiment saw a significant decline in alcohol-related crime (14%

decline in 1987) while arrests increased (9% increase) (Stewart, 1993). In this

replication experiment, no control site was selected for comparison with the results

achieved in Brighton. On this basis, while the results are interesting and noteworthy, it

is not possible to conclude that such an experiment was ‘successful’ (Graham & Homel,

2008). A further replication of the Torquay experiment occurred in Sydney, Australia;

however, despite being the subject of intense scrutiny researchers were unable to find

support for the hypothesis that this type of intervention leads to reductions in alcohol-

related violence in licensed premises (Burns & Coumarelos, 1993; Burns, Flaherty,

Ireland, & Frances, 1995).

41

2.7 The authority to police licensed premises

Policing occurs in accordance with a legislative and policy framework. The

legislation provides the legal authority for police officers to engage in certain activities,

whereas Service policy and operational influencers and directives provide the

organisational expectation as to how the legislation will be implemented.

2.7.1 Legislative requirements

The functions of the QPS are articulated in Section 2.3 of the PSAA, and

although not specifically referring to licensed premises, the objects of the section are

very applicable to that context. In broad general terms, Section 2.3 provides for:

• the preservation of peace and good order;

• the protection of all communities in the State and all members thereof;

• the prevention of crime;

• the detection of offenders and bringing of offenders to justice;

• the upholding of the law generally;

• the administration in a fair, responsible and efficient manner and subject to

due process of law and direction of the commissioner; and

• the provision of the services and the rendering of help reasonably sought in

an emergency or otherwise, as is reasonably expected by the community.

The ‘Functions of Service’ as outlined in the PSAA provisions are relevant to the

policing of licensed premises in a number of important areas. Clearly it supports the

preservation of peace and good order, prevention of crime and protection of members of

the community. Police operate in a complex environment utilising powers and authority

which comes from disparate legislative authorities. One such authority is the Liquor

Act 1992 (Qld), which provides for the effective regulation of the liquor industry. The

provisions of Section 2.3 above when referring to ‘upholding of the law’ implies the

effective application by police of the Liquor Act 1992 (Qld).

OLGR is required under the provisions of the Liquor Act to seek comment from

the QPS on certain applications made under the Act which have the potential to

adversely affect communities if they are granted. In contributing to this licensing

process, police meet their obligations in terms of ‘upholding the law’ and contribute to

community safety by providing OLGR with the necessary information and intelligence

42

to appropriately consider such licenses having regard to the objects of the Act and the

public interest.

2.7.2 Vision, mission and authority to regulate licensed premises

There are a number of operational decision making and strategy setting levels

which impact on the policing of licensed premises. At the police department (e.g. QPS)

operational level, police officers are required to work autonomously, but with

legislation and policy guidance to determine their role. The policy and strategy setting

level above the divisional or operational level is the district level, in which

commissioned officers provide the operational direction for personnel for regional,

whole-of-Service and whole-of-government priorities. The next level is the regional

level, where the senior management of the region provide direction based on

government and organisational priorities. Such guidance is generally not overly

specific, but is broad by design, to allow for innovation in terms of implementation.

The highest organisational level is the Deputy Commissioner and Commissioner

level, which for the purposes of this research is termed the ‘corporate level’. This

corporate level sets broad strategic intent. The ethos or philosophy is established

having regard for the needs of government, and ultimately communicated to all levels of

the community. In an optimum model, the ideal is to achieve a situation in which the

strategy at the highest level is clearly articulated and where flexibility in terms of

implementation is maintained. This could be described in simple terms as “keeping the

strategy tight but the implementation loose”. Conversely, at the lowest levels, the

nature of the implementation would need to be clearly defined for those on the ground

who give effect to such direction.

At the state and national government levels there is a complex policy making

environment. Figure 2 identifies policy framework and policy drivers influencing the

policing of licensed premises. Understanding the structure of police management in

terms of policy and operational setting is important because it establishes the context for

police operational planning and operational delivery. This research will explore these

key issues from the perspective of both the operational officer and the senior officer

who directs and influences the operational policing of licensed premises.

43

Policy Level Influencing Policies, Strategies and Bodies

Australian Government

Level

National Drug Strategy 2004–09

Ministerial Council on Drugs Strategy

Australian Council on Drugs

The National Alcohol Strategy 2006–09

The National Drug Strategy Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders

Complementary Action Plan 2003–06

Directions in Australian New Zealand Policing 2008–11

State Government Level Queensland Drug Strategy 2006–2010

Queensland Government – Towards Q2 Policy

Queensland Drug Coordinating Committee

State Police Policy Level

State/Region/District/

Division

Queensland Police Service Strategic Plan 2009–2013

Police Commissioner’s Policy Statement (4P’s)

Operational Procedures Manual (OPM)

Service Operational Procedures (SOP’s)

QPS Research Priorities 2009–2010

Future Directions Statements (Regional/District Level)

Priorities Statements (Regional/ District/ Divisional Level)

Operational Plans

28 Day Roster Cycles

Figure 2: Policy frameworks and drivers

2.7.2.1 Police region, district and divisional priorities

This research is directed at policing activity which occurs in a police district in

Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. This District, referred to as the Brisbane Central

District (BCD), is one of four districts within the Metropolitan North Region (MNR),

QPS. The policing of licensed premises and alcohol-related incidents, as with other

contextual issues, occurs within a strategic and operational policy environment. The

strategic approach to policing within MNR is captured in a Future Directions document,

which states that continual improvement of performance and innovation is fostered and

encouraged (Future Directions for Metropolitan North Region, undated). This

document supports the Queensland Police Service Strategic Plan 2009–13 and indicates

that the priority of enhancing community safety is achieved utilising a range of specific

strategies.

44

In December 2007, a Priorities Statement (2007–2008) stated that the mission of

the BCD was ‘committed to working in partnerships to enhance public safety through

professionalism in policing’. The key areas identified within the priority statement were

partnerships, proactive strategies, professionalism, and accountability. Brisbane

Central District Operation Plan 2007–08 clearly articulates with the QPS Strategic

Plan 2009–13 and is supportive of the MNR priorities. This Operational Plan has a

strong focus on ‘Community Safety and Engagement’ and has clearly identifiable

strategies relating to partnerships, collaboration, and policing strategies aimed at public

safety as its hallmark. The document, within the section ‘Crime Management’,

specifically states that ‘Liquor Investigation’ is a priority. At the police District level,

the outcomes to be achieved (by BCD) include:

• ensure the identification and monitoring of emerging liquor-related

problem premises;

• develop initiatives to target liquor-related crime within BCD entertainment

precincts;

• overview the deliberation of all liquor licensing applications impacting on

the District; and

• develop and work in close partnership with the Division of Liquor

Licensing to ensure a cohesive partnership with regard to liquor

enforcement (BCD Operational Plan 2007–2008, pp. 3–4).

The key strategies to be implemented through the allocation of policing resources

are then developed into 28-day operational plans. Rostering within the QPS is

undertaken on a 28-day cycle. These rostering cycles have been negotiated through

various enterprise bargaining agreements to not only capture industrial entitlements, but

also to provide officers with certainty concerning their days and hours of operation.

This form of rostering also provides police managers with the ability to forward plan in

terms of allocating resources to meet operational needs.

Section 2.6 documents and demonstrates the considerable organisational and

operational complexity that surrounds officers engaging in licensed premises. From a

superficial and uninformed perspective it might be construed that officers act with great

degrees of informality and autonomy. But as it has been explained, this is not the case

from the strategic and operational perspective. The layers of policy (and legislation),

the internal authorising mechanisms and the operational planning processes and cycles

45

mean that policing licensed premises is anything but informal; rather, it is highly

structured. This has implications for the way that police are deployed and tasked, and

moreover, has significant implications for the way police respond to licensed premises.

2.7.2.2 Police corporate policy related to alcohol enforcement

Commissioners of Police in Australia and New Zealand are signatories to a

strategic approach to policing which is outlined in the Directions in Australia and New

Zealand Policing 2008–2011 (DANZP) (Ministerial Council for Police and Emergency

Management – Police, 2008). This is an overarching strategy aimed at improving the

focus on policing services and fostering partnerships and cooperation between agencies

in both countries. The strategy “reflects Ministerial priorities for policing, and presents

a shared vision and a joint commitment to foster efficiency, effectiveness, continuous

improvement and innovation” (Ministerial Council for Police and Emergency

Management – Police, 2008, pp. 3–6). Although this direction does not refer

specifically to policing alcohol-related harm and the management of licensed premises,

key activities associated with these issues are included, for example: Community

Safety (1.1), Community Security (1.2), Working in Partnership (1.3), Crime Prevention

(1.4), Strategic Influence (3.1), Policy Development (3.2), Information Sharing (3.3),

Knowledge Based Policing (4.1), and Accountability (4.4) (Ministerial Council for

Police and Emergency Management – Police, 2008).

The Queensland Police Service Strategic Plan 2009–2013 outlines the vision,

mission and values of the Service. Importantly, it also documents the objectives,

strategies and performance indicators of the Service. The QPS, through the Strategic

Plan, supports the Queensland Government’s commitment to the Q2 Policy objectives,

in particular that relating to “Fair – Safe and Caring Communities”. The vision of the

Service states: “Queensland is a safe and secure place to live, visit and do business”.

The mission articulated in the Plan states: “deliver high quality, innovate and

progressive and responsive policing services”. These policy approaches are achieved

using the values of the Commissioner’s 4Ps: Professionalism, Performance, People and

Partnerships. Although the strategies articulated in the Strategic Plan do not specify

alcohol-related harm, their focus on preventing, responding to, investigating and solving

crime have a strong inter-relationship with alcohol misuse.

46

2.8 Research gaps and limitations

Although there is a large body of literature on the subject of alcohol-related harm,

there is much less research specifically on licensed premises. Of the research that does

exist relating to licensed premises, much of this research focuses on what officers do

(i.e. specific policing outcomes) as opposed to their knowledge of available strategies,

whether they employ these strategies and the factors which serve to encourage or

discourage them from policing licensed premises. The research is not always

unequivocal as to what strategy is definitively successful in dealing with problems

either inside licensed premises or outside. In fact, even where research is conducted,

the initial findings (e.g. Jeffs & Saunders, 1983) and later replication trials have resulted

in equivocation as to the most efficacious policing approach (Graham & Homel, 2008).

The limited literature to date has focused primarily on what strategies officers

specifically employ in licensed premises. There is very little research on what strategies

police believe are effective, and still less research on the extent of implementation of

such strategies in a licensed premises setting. The research often refers to the

environmental factors that can enhance safety in licensed premises and also those

factors which contribute to less safe environments. Police intervention often features as

part of the suite of strategies which contribute to safety. But still there is a lack of

guidance for police. Research consistently reports findings about licensed premises and

police intervention based on observable facts. Little is known about police attitudes and

beliefs on issues such as their preparedness to enforce these challenging environments

(e.g. skill levels and training), the role of senior officers in their deployment, the quality

of the relationship with other stakeholders and the factors (barriers) which serve to

encourage or discourage them from engaging with licensed premises. The research

questions relevant to this research have therefore emerged specifically as a result of the

identified gaps in the available knowledge.

2.9 Research questions

Study One in the research program will examine the following important research

questions:

47

Research Question 1 [RQ1]

What is the nature and extent of the police intervention when policing alcohol-

related matters both inside and outside licensed premises?

Research Question 2 [RQ2]

What is the level of police officer knowledge of strategies to address alcohol-

related harm both inside and outside licensed premises?

Research Question 3 [RQ3]

What are the beliefs that police hold that influence the policing of licensed

premises?

Research Question 4 [RQ4]

How effective do police officers believe certain strategies are in preventing

alcohol-related harm both inside and outside licensed premises?

Research Question 5 [RQ5]

What are the skills police believe they need to possess to deal with incidents

involving alcohol inside and outside licensed premises?

Research Question 6 [RQ6]

What are the barriers which prevent or reduce the capability of police officers to

effectively manage alcohol-incidents both inside and outside licensed premises?

48

Study Two in the research program will examine the following important

research question:

Research Question 7 [RQ7]

What is the attitude of senior police to police knowledge, skills, attitudes and

capacity to reduce alcohol-related harm inside and outside licensed premises?

Study Three in the research program will examine the following important

research question:

Research Question 8 [RQ8]

What is the attitude of those within the broader liquor industry (government,

non-government and community but exclusive of police) to police knowledge,

skills, attitudes and capacity to reduce alcohol-related harm inside and outside

licensed premises?

2.10 Summary

Australians, on a per capita basis, consume large quantities of alcohol. It is noted

that approximately one-third of all alcohol that is consumed in Australia occurs within

licensed premises (Lang et al., 1992). Alcohol is associated with significant health and

social harms and is a major contributing factor in aggression and violence. Some

licensed premises are responsible for disproportionate amounts of harm. There are

certain factors, identified in the literature, which are associated with licensed premises

that make them problematic (e.g. late night trading, permissive attitudes to rules and

regulations, intoxication, no commitment to RSA, physical layout).

Aggression and violence are matters that police routinely attend, particularly

relating to policing licensed premises. Policing licensed premises is thought to be

amongst the most difficult and challenging of situations to which police to respond.

Police have an obligation under the Liquor Act 1992 (Qld) to enforce the provisions of

the Act relating to RSA. Criminological theory and anecdotal evidence suggests that a

police presence both inside and outside licensed premises can moderate patron

49

behaviours, leading to decreased aggression and therefore fewer assaults. Despite this,

anecdotally, it is believed that police do not like policing licensed premises.

There is, however, scant Australian-based research which comprehensively

examines the attitudes, values, knowledge and perceived skill levels of police to engage

with and in licensed premises. Exceptions to this are research identified by Findlay et al.

(2000, 2002) and K. L. Smith et al. (2001). However, these research findings were

published more than a decade ago and may not be relevant to today’s policing of

licensed premises.

The literature refers to barriers that prevent officers from undertaking this work.

Understanding these barriers and ameliorating the factors which prevent this type of

policing are likely to lead to enhanced safety for licensed premises, patrons and the

broader community. It is thought that by understanding the factors which constrain or

prevent officers from undertaking this important work police agencies will be more

likely to upskill officers, remove any identified barriers and encourage and support

officers in policing licensed premises. The effect of this could be to encourage more

officers to engage with licensed premises more frequently. This could prevent offences

being committed in the first instance and where offences do occur, enable detection and

prosecution, which could serve to discourage further offending.

The next chapter (Chapter Three) will examine the theory relevant to the policing

of licensed premises from four perspectives: the societal level, the police agency level,

the licensed premises level, and the individual level. In particular, this chapter will

examine the principal theory from management, the Three Circle Public Value Model

which has informed the research.

50

CHAPTER THREE: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

3.1 Introduction …………………………………………... 51

3.2 Police agency-focused theories ………………………. 51

3.3 Licensed premises-focused theories …………………. 54

3.4 Individual-focused theories ………………………….. 57

3.5 Society-focused theories …………………………….. 60

3.6 Linking theory to research questions ………………… 63

3.7 Three Circle Public Value Model ……………………. 67

3.8 Relevance of the Model to the program of research …. 70

3.7 Summary ……………………………………………... 72

51

3.1 Introduction

The literature and theories that underpin specific research are important

considerations in explaining the developing body of knowledge in a particular

discipline. The main role of theory, within this program of research, is to guide the

approach to answering the research questions.

The research undertaken here builds on previous research from disciplines such

as psychology, anthropology, sociology and criminology, with respect to issues

pertaining to policing, crime and alcohol use. The work of Findlay et al. (2000, 2002)

and K. L. Smith et al. (2001) has particular relevance for Study One of this research.

Theories of alcohol-related crime, violence and antisocial behaviour are also considered

and will assist in the analysis and interpretation of the data. Explaining the issue of

alcohol-related harm within the context of licensed premises and then considering the

police intervention draws on many theories and disciplines. While cognisant of

theoretical diversity, the theories generally fall into four main categories, depending on

their focus: police agency, licensed premises, society, and individual-focused theories

and models (refer to Figure 3). This will be discussed in the following section.

Police agency-focused theories Licensed premises-focused theories

Enforcement Styles Problem-Oriented and Partnership Policing

Third Party Policing Performance Review Model

Public Value Theory

Availability of Alcohol Theory Place Based Theory

Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design Routine Activity Theory

Situational Crime Prevention

Individual-focused theories Societal-focused theories

Biochemical Explanations of Alcohol Psychological Disinhibition Hypothesis

Expectancy and Arousal Models of Aggression General Strain Theory

Indirect Cause Hypothesis

Place Based Theory Responsive Regulation Theory Social Disorganisation Theory

Social Control and Learning Theory

Figure 3: Theoretical frameworks matrix

3.2 Police agency-focused theories

There are a number of theories, falling within the police agency category, which

are relevant to this program of research. Some of these, however, are more relevant to

the key research questions than others. The following discussion focuses specifically on

the theories that relate to the nature of police interventions (RQ1), police officer

knowledge of effective strategies (RQ2), barriers preventing optimum engagement at

52

licensed premises by police (RQ6), and the attitudes of senior police (RQ7). In some

cases the theories discussed assist in explaining the nature and type of intervention used

by police (e.g. Enforcement Styles) and which are supported by the police agency. In

other cases, the theories define the nature of relationships that exist with other

stakeholders (e.g. Third Party Policing) and explain the ways in which police use those

other agencies’ legitimate power, influence and resources to achieve better outcomes

than would otherwise occur.

In terms of Enforcement Styles, there is a significant amount of research

examining the personalities of police and their performance (Brown & Willis, 1985;

Colman & Gorman, 1982; Henkel et al., 1997; Perrot & Taylor, 1995; Wortley &

Homel, 1995). This research has identified different policing styles broadly described

as service, watchman and legalistic (J. Q. Wilson, 1968). However, there is limited

research on the characteristics and attitudes of police undertaking enforcement in

specific policing contexts, particularly enforcement in licensed premises. There is also

minimal research on any predominant style of policing either inside or outside licensed

premises.

Problem-Oriented and Partnership Policing is allied to the concept of

community policing and as a philosophy has gained prominence within the last decade

in western law enforcement. Identifying and defining the relationship between policing

agencies and the community is complex. The concept of community policing has been

mainstreamed into the organisational philosophy of western policing agencies since the

1980s; however, the meaning of the term ‘community policing’ has become blurred

around the edges (Gee & Scott, 1998). The idea of systematising police interaction with

the community in a partnership approach to reducing crime was foreign to policing

ideology pre-1980 (Sarre, 1996). Problem-Oriented Policing (POP), which focuses on

research-based, strategic approaches to early interventions in policing problems, became

part of mainstream policing practice (Prenzler & Sarre, 2009). Problem-Oriented and

Partnership Policing (POPP) theoretically aims to target problems using intelligence-led

resourcing aimed at engendering public support in the identification and resolution of

crime. The prevention of crime is the overall end game of this approach. POPP has

particular relevance to the licensed premises environment from an intelligence-led

resourcing perspective as well as from the position of engaging other sectors and

individuals in crime prevention.

53

The concept of Third Party Policing acknowledges the situations in which police

officers and agencies work to develop key partnerships with individuals, groups and

organisations, with the aim of regulating, controlling and preventing crime (Sparrow,

2000). Much of contemporary police work uses problem-solving and partnership

approaches which involve police engaging with others in an effort to work

collaboratively. In some cases, such approaches aim to identify ‘levers’ by which ‘third

parties’ will take either some or full responsibility for parts of the regulatory

responsibility. The process of using legal levers to regulate, co-opt and coerce third

parties is the motivation for the concept of ‘third party policing’ (Mazerolle & Ransley,

2005). Police use third party policing principles in their engagement with key

stakeholders involved in the night-time economy. Examples of this abound and include

the employment of security providers to undertake the private policing of licensed

venues, using closed circuit television (CCTV), and monitoring of such devices by the

local council.

Performance Review Models have gained prominence post-1994 when the then

Commissioner of the New York Police Department implemented a strategic crime

management approach known as COMPSTAT, an abbreviation of ‘Computer Driven

Crime Statistics’. The process involved senior executive officers meeting in high

pressure environments on a regular basis to scrutinise the performance of precinct

commanders (Henry, 2002; McDonald, 2002; Silverman, 1999). COMPSTAT was the

genesis for Australian policing agencies developing hybrids of this model for

application to the Australian context. In Queensland, this gave rise to the creation of the

Operational Performance Review (OPR) process in the early 2000s. Many proponents

attribute the dramatic reduction in crime in New York to COMPSTAT (Bratton, 1997,

1998; Dodenhoff, 1996; Safir, 1998). Similarly, in Queensland OPR is regarded as

being a significant factor in the Service’s successful identification of crime and

intelligence-led response. OPR is important contextually in terms of policing licensed

premises given its ability to interrogate police performance at both the operational and

strategic levels within policing districts. OPR is also at times used as a vehicle to

interrogate themes within policing such as ‘public order policing’ or ‘Drink Safe

Precinct policing’, terms which are described later in this thesis.

54

3.3 Licensed premises-focused theories

There are a range of theories derived from diverse disciplines which assist in

explaining human behaviour (e.g. Availability of Alcohol Theory) and factors relevant to

the policing of licensed premises (e.g. Crime Prevention Through Environmental

Design). Still other theories emphasise the preventative effective of a highly visible

policing presence as an agent to deter crime (e.g. Routine Activity Theory). There is a

strong and emerging body of literature examining factors which exacerbate harms in

licensed premises and these factors are particularly relevant to the policing of such

premises. The theories selected for discussion below, which focus on licensed

premises, are particularly relevant to the research questions investigating the nature and

extent of the police intervention (RQ1), police officers’ knowledge of effective

strategies (RQ2), beliefs that police hold (RQ3), and barriers to effective policing of

licensed premises (RQ6).

The Availability of Alcohol Theory contends that if the availability of alcohol was

reduced, then community consumption levels would reduce and therefore the quantum

of alcohol-related crime, violence and antisocial behaviour would likewise reduce

(Bruun et al., 1975). Single (1988) argues that (1) the greater the availability of alcohol

the higher the average consumption, (2) the higher the average consumption the greater

the number of excessive drinkers, and (3) the greater the number of excessive drinkers

the greater the social and health harms from alcohol. There have been a number of

studies which have attempted to prove this theory. While there has been some support

in the literature for the second and third propositions (Casswell, 1991; Edwards et al.,

1994; Eliany & Rush, 1992; Gruenwald, 1993; Holder, 1993; Peacock, 1992; Single,

1998), the first proposition remains a debatable and a contested one (Palk, 2008).

However, this theory has influenced traditional approaches to policing, particularly the

organisational view of the need to reduce trading hours of premises and employ

strategies to limit alcohol supply.

Place Based Theory makes an important contribution to explaining factors

relevant to crime. While the many psychological, sociological and dispositional

explanations for alcohol use and crime have been discussed previously, it is important

to recognise the significance of place and time as factors in understanding and

explaining alcohol-related crime, violence and antisocial behaviour. Although

application of this theory has been pursued using reasonably unsophisticated tools, the

55

advent of computer mapping and geographical statistical tools has enhanced its value.

A range of theories, such as Rational Choice Theory, Routine Activity Theory and Crime

Pattern Theory, serve to highlight the importance of place and time in understanding

crime (Palk, 2008). These theories postulate that crime is not a random event, but rather

is concentrated in certain areas known as ‘hot spots’ (Jochelson, 2007; Weisburd, 2008;

Braga & Weisburd, 2009). This is particularly the case with alcohol-related incidents

associated with licensed premises where the violence can be tracked to particular

licensed premises, at certain times of the week and certain times of the day. In terms of

violence, the harms occurring at licensed premises therefore are not evenly distributed

amongst licensed premises or limited to certain times.

Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) theory is concerned

with the notion that it is possible to apply knowledge and creative design to the built

environment in such a way as to prevent or lessen the incidence of crime, violence or

antisocial behaviour. The key principles of CPTED include surveillance, legibility,

territoriality, personal and community ‘ownership’ of outcomes, management, and

vulnerability.

As a theoretical approach to crime prevention, CPTED principles have particular

relevance to the built environment both inside and outside licensed premises. Naturally,

the greatest opportunity to affect the built environment is prior to construction of

premises, and evidence suggests that early in the planning phase is optimum. CPTED

principles have increasingly influenced the construction of new licensed premises. The

institutional learning related to access and egress, crowding issues and trigger points for

aggression such as toilets near thoroughfares and near bar areas, are design

considerations for new premises (Doherty & Roche, 2003). CPTED principles also

have relevance for design issues outside and in the vicinity of licensed premises.

CCTV, lighting, location of taxi ranks, and location of bollards are examples of built

environment features based on crime prevention principles central to CPTED. Building

CPTED best practice design features into either new construction or retro-fitting

existing premises is not without, in some cases, considerable cost and not all premises

operators are motivated to employ such principles unless these are license conditions

requiring them to do so. CPTED is an important consideration within this program of

research given that it explains issues demonstrated to be associated with safety, as

opposed to officers’ perceptions of their level of safety within such premises. The

56

barriers to policing licensed premises are a considerable focus of this research and

personal safety is thought to be a key factor for police.

Routine Activity Theory, one of the main elements of Environmental

Criminology, was developed in the 1970s as a theoretical concept to explain the

variations in victimisation rates among different categories of persons, across areas or

over time. It argues that crime occurs when the following three components come

together in a given space and time: (1) an accessible target, (2) the absence of capable

guardians that could intervene, and (3) the presence of a motivated offender (Graham &

Homel, 2008; Palk, 2008). An accessible target can include a person, place or other

property (real or tangible capable of being stolen). A capable guardian can include a

person (such as a police officer, security guard or witness) who can prevent the

commission of an offence. The last component of the model, the motivated offender, is

central to this theory, as it attempts to examine offending from the perspective of the

offender and explain crime through the coalescence of various factors (Graham &

Homel, 2008). This theory is relevant to this program of research given that not only is

it strongly linked to the police role in terms of engagement in licensed premises but also

because the primary reason for such engagement is to act as a ‘guardian’ to prevent

crime, violence and antisocial behaviour.

All components of Routine Activity Theory are relevant to the licensed premises

context. First, the accessible target, which in most cases is other patrons but can be

security personnel and bar staff, are both numerous and accessible. Crowding in many

licensed premises, particularly hotels and nightclubs at peak times puts offenders and

victims in close proximity. Second, the absence of capable guardians is a very real

condition in, and a challenge for, many licensed premises. The absence of effective

guardians leads to a perception of permissiveness and tolerance of aggression.

However, guardians – primarily bar staff, security providers and licensees – have a

significant opportunity to create a culture opposed to violence and offending. The third

factor, the motivated offender, is not unique to the licensed premises environment.

However, under certain circumstances, licensed premises can be highly correlated with

aggression (Graham & Homel, 2008). The provision of alcohol exacerbates the level of

angst and aggression and deprives individuals of the capacity to resolve conflict in

rational ways. In any consideration of crime, violence and antisocial behaviour, the

three components of Routine Activity Theory should be thought of as highly relevant

factors.

57

Situational Crime Prevention Theory is an approach that incorporates a number

of theories. It focuses on attempts to reduce the opportunities for criminals to commit

crime, influence the thinking of criminals in terms of what they can get away with, and

makes it seem harder or riskier and therefore less rewarding to commit crime. The main

theories falling under the umbrella of Situational Crime Prevention are Environmental

Criminology, Rational Choice, and Routine Activity Theory. The techniques developed

from Situational Crime Prevention Theory have evolved since the 1990s in response to

advances in our understanding of crime, crime reduction theory and the changes in

crime itself. This has meant that the number of techniques has increased accordingly.

Clarke (1995) originally proposed 12 techniques as situational measures to prevent a

variety of 'street and predatory crimes'.

Clarke and Homel (1997) increased the original 12 to 16 techniques by adding

the category of 'removing the excuses for crime'. This reflected the application of

situational measures to a broad range of offences including tax evasion, traffic offences,

sexual harassment and theft of employer's property (Clarke, 1997). In response to

Wortley's (2001) critique of Situational Crime Prevention Theory, Cornish and Clarke

(2003) expanded the techniques further to 25 by including the category 'reduce

provocations'. (See Appendix 7, which lists the 25 techniques previously referred).

These theories, focused on licensed premises, are important because of the

quantum of alcohol that is consumed and the proportion of consumption that takes place

in licensed premises, and because of the extent of alcohol-related violence occurring

within licensed premises. Such theories are particularly relevant when considering the

motivations for, and types of, police responses.

3.4 Individual-focused theories

Theories that explain why individuals consume alcohol and other substances, and

then become violent or engage in antisocial behaviour requiring police intervention are

useful considerations from the perspective of understanding the nature of the police

intervention. The motivations of individuals to consume alcohol and the effect of these

substances at the physiological and psychological levels are important considerations in

understanding police responses to intoxication and antisocial behaviour. This is

particularly so where intoxication exacerbates or contributes to aggression and thereby

impacts on public and officer safety. The theories discussed below are particularly

58

relevant to research questions dealing with the following issues: the nature and extent of

police intervention (RQ1), the effectiveness of various strategies used in and around

licensed premises (RQ4), skills that police believe they need to deal with issues (RQ5),

and barriers preventing or reducing optimum police engagement at licensed premises

(RQ6). The following are therefore helpful in gaining an understanding of such

phenomena.

Biochemical explanations of alcohol use are important considerations within the

legal context. Intoxication during or immediately prior to the commission of an offence

or initiation of some other antisocial behaviour is often raised as a possible legal

defence or explanation for such behaviour (Palk, 2008). A significant proportion of

offenders admit to consuming alcohol prior to or at the time of the offence. Some

research has put this figure at between 40–60% (Bartholomew, 1985; Dingwall, 2006;

Greenfield, 1998; Pernanen et al., 2002; Richardson & Budd, 2003; Rossow, 2004).

The effect that alcohol has on the central nervous system (CNS) is well established in

the literature. There is general agreement that this impairment increases with

consumption, while a number of factors (e.g. gender, body mass, metabolism potential)

result in consumption having different effects from individual to individual. At the

cognitive level, alcohol generally affects the ability of the individual to reason abstractly

and consider the opinions of others. Furthermore, they become less concerned about

their behaviours because alcohol lowers inhibition (Palk, 2008). Factors that explain

individual difference in the impact of alcohol consumption are important considerations

within this research because they can explain why males are over-represented in terms

of intoxication and similarly over-represented in terms of violent and unpredictable

behaviours. This knowledge influences police ability to both identify risk and respond

to situations.

Psychological Disinhibition Hypothesis espouses the notion that alcohol

intoxication reduces an individual’s inhibition. Intoxication is widely associated with

violent offences or confronting behaviour directed towards others because an

individual’s perceptions of safety are affected. This is particularly so when intoxication

reduces the verbal acuity of the individual to resolve interpersonal issues rationally

(Palk, 2008). The Psychological Disinhibition Hypothesis advocates that alcohol

intoxication weakens an individual’s inhibition by affecting the cortex of the brain, with

a resulting loss of control (Bushman, 1997; Kallmen & Gustafson, 1998). It is noted

that while there are studies which lend support to this hypothesis, the findings are not

59

conclusive (Deitrich & Erwin, 1996; Kallmen & Gustafson, 1998; J. White &

Humeniuk, 1994).

The notion of biochemical explanations to alcohol-related aggression does not

have universal support: some researchers have argued that it is learned beliefs or

expectations which weaken the natural inhibitors (Goldman, Brown, & Christiansen,

1987). In the Expectancy and Arousal Models of Aggression, the drinker comes to

expect that heavy consumption of alcohol is associated with aggression. These

expectations and behaviours may occur through experiential learning at an early age

(Palk, 2008). Despite a number of studies showing that participants act out their

expectancies when supplied with a placebo, the results of meta-analytic reviews of

experimental studies suggest that the link between intoxication, expectancy and

aggression is tenuous (Bushman, 1997; Bushman & Cooper, 1990; Exum, 2006).

General Strain Theory developed out of earlier theories, especially the Original

Strain Theory. The Original Strain Theory has connection to Merton’s Anomie Theory

and Cohen’s Social Control Theory. These later theories explain an individual’s

propensity to commit crime by examining the social structures that exist to influence

this offending, while General Strain Theory examines relationships between

individuals, particularly the negative relationships which contribute to offending

behaviour. As the name suggests, this theory is focused on those factors which place

strain on the individual, for example, lack of wealth or unfulfilled career goals. Anger

and aggression are key factors in General Strain Theory, particularly as these are related

to deviant behaviour. The strain (otherwise known as adversity) produces a state of

arousal, and anger is a significant part of this state. Licensed premises are a microcosm

of the broader community in which they are located. When patrons visit licensed

premises they bring with them their attitudes, values and beliefs and there are occasions

where they bring their biases, anger and aggression, which can lead to strain, resulting

in offending.

Indirect Cause Hypothesis suggests that alcohol encourages aggression indirectly

through a number of psychological, cognitive and emotional changes. Intoxication

contributes to impairment of intellectual ability and reduction in the individual’s

understanding and comprehension of the consequences of risk (Palk, 2008).

Intoxication (impacted by a range of factors), when combined with frustration or

aggression, increases the likelihood of violence. Bushman’s (1997) review of

experimental studies on alcohol-fuelled aggression found that there was stronger

60

inferential support for the Indirect Cause Hypothesis than there was for disinhibition or

expectancy models.

Theories which are focused on explanations of intoxication and aggression from

the point of view of the individual are important considerations in this program of

research. Although police respond to incidents at licensed premises they are in fact

responding either to the behaviour of an individual or the interaction of two or more

individuals. Alcohol is strongly correlated with aggression within such premises and

understanding why patrons consume to intoxicating levels and how intoxication affects

behaviour are important considerations in terms of police responses (e.g. strategy

formulation) and policy development.

3.5 Society-focused theories

When examining policing of licensed premises it is important to understand that a

licensed premises is a microcosm of the broader society in which it is located.

Therefore, it is necessary to consider contextual issues and social theories that explain

offending at licensed premises. Although there are myriad theories which could be

applied to this program of research from a societal perspective, the theories discussed

below have been selected because of their relevance to the research questions posed.

Such theories are relevant to explanations of alcohol linkages to crime (Place Based

Theory) and the effect of breakdowns of the agents of socialisation, which can tend to

increase offending (Social Disorganisation Theory). Still other theories, drawing from

the field of criminology, refer to the effect of reasonably insignificant offences having

negative impacts on public safety that eventually lead to more serious offending

(Broken Windows Theory). These theories are useful for answering the following

research questions: the beliefs that police officers hold (RQ3), the effectiveness of

various strategies that police employ to police licensed premises (RQ4), the barriers

which prevent police action or reduce the capability of police (RQ6), and the attitude of

senior police to police officers policing licensed premises (RQ7).

Place Based Theory, examined in Section 3.3 on theories relevant to licensed

premises, has equal applicability to analysis at the societal level. When analysing

alcohol use and crime, place and time are important factors in understanding and

explaining offending (Jochelson, 2007; Weisburd, 2008; Braga & Weisburd, 2009).

61

Responsive Regulation Theory is distinguished from market governance

arrangements by what triggers a regulatory response and the nature of the response

(Ayres & Braithwaite, 1992). Good policy analysis is generally about the consideration

of markets given the choice between free market and government regulation (Ayres &

Braithwaite, 1992). Given that the objects of the Liquor Act 1992 (Qld) are concerned

with economic viability of the liquor industry and harm minimisation, a regulatory

approach needs to balance these two seemingly contradictory interests. Efficacious

regulation of the alcohol industry therefore should consider the motivations and needs

of broad interests within society. The use and consumption of alcohol in public settings

has a strong public (or State-based) regulatory history. Self-regulation has not been a

public policy approach adopted in Australia or indeed in many other western countries.

The regulatory approaches favoured in Australia have historically been ones in which

the model employed has various actors. The regulatory space relating to licensed

premises is crammed with State-based police agencies, city council officers, liquor

licensing officials, fire and rescue personnel and the licensed premises operators

themselves. In addition, licensees and their employees have regulatory responsibilities

with regards to patron behaviours and expectations. The night-time economy is highly

attuned to changes in the regulatory environment, particularly because such chages have

the potential to impact upon profits.

Social Disorganisation Theory suggests that when there is a breakdown or a

decline in the influence of a society’s agents of socialisation, crime, violence and

antisocial behaviour are more likely. These agents can include both informal controls

(such as customs, norms, values and traditions) and formal controls (such as schools,

church, social groups, sporting membership). This is a controversial theory, generally

associated with explanations for crime that are based on statistics indicating that crime

emanates from low socio-economic areas close to cities (Palk, 2008). Critics of this

theory argue that it does not take into account the personal drivers or motivators for

crime. Broken Windows Theory, which is a variation on Social Disorganisation Theory,

suggests that even relatively insignificant offences (minor damage and graffiti) can

negatively impact upon public safety and affect the mood and tenor of an area, thus

leading to more frequent and more serious offences (Kelling & Coles, 1996; J. Q.

Wilson & Kelling, 1982). A further development arising from Broken Windows Theory

is the policy approach to policing known as Zero Tolerance Policing. This approach

advocates serious pursuit of relatively minor indiscretions, and although only

62

implemented in a limited fashion in Australia, the approach has gained popularity in

New York and other USA cities. Broken Windows Theory and Zero Tolerance Policing

approaches, despite their appeal to policy-makers, politicians and the media, are both

controversial and unproven (Gladwell, 2002). Social Disorganisation Theory can be

applied to the licensed premises context, in the sense that professional, well-maintained

licensed premises have a positive impact on reducing violence and antisocial behaviour.

Social Control and Learning Theory, originally proposed by Hirschi (1969) and

sometimes referred to as Bonding Theory, highlights strong attachment to values and

social norms as a way of maintaining social order (Palk, 2008). Bonding Theory links

crime and offending behaviour with weak social and individual commitments to one

another. Both social and personal attachments and commitment to common values,

goals and ideals are central to the maintenance of order within communities according

to such theories. When these bonds, with whomever and for whatever reason, break

down, then the opportunity for disorder is enhanced. This is particularly the case when

the bonds between the young and the important agents of socialisation such as peers,

school, religion and parents break down to the point where truancy, drug and alcohol

use and other acts of delinquency occur (Palk, 2008). While Bonding Theory has its

critics who argue that it does not provide an explanation for all types of crime (Lilly,

Cullen, & Ball, 1995), a large body of empirical work supports the effectiveness of

social learning theories in explaining deviant behaviour (Akers, 1998).

Attitudes to alcohol, and other drugs, can and have changed over time.

Acceptability of certain types of alcohol, the ways in which people consume and the

settings of alcohol consumption are all related to individual choice, but they are also

reflected more broadly at the societal level. Paradoxically, while Australian

communities have been tolerant of alcohol consumption, there are strong negative

feelings for intoxicated loutish behaviour that impacts broader and more mainstream

community and this has been particularly so in more recent times. Knowing what is

socially acceptable is therefore important in assisting police and police organisations to

understand what it is that communities want from agencies in terms of responding to

crime, violence and antisocial behaviour.

63

3.6 Linking theory to research questions

Theory is used in this research to guide the approach to answering the research

questions. Sections 3.2–3.5 inclusive have discussed a range of theories grouped into

four broad categories depending on their focus. These areas relate to the police agency,

the licensed premises, the individual and society. The general relevance of these

theories to the program of research has been highlighted. However, there are more

specific linkages between the theories outlined and each of the research questions. This

section therefore aims to demonstrate the link between the theoretical approaches and

particular research questions.

In terms of the nature and extent of the police intervention when policing of

alcohol-related matters inside and outside licensed premises (RQ1), there are a range of

theories which are relevant. Some of these, focusing on the individual, relate to the

reasons why individuals become intoxicated (e.g. Biochemical Explanations of Alcohol

Use), and the disinhibiting factors that lead to offending behaviours (e.g. Psychological

Disinhibition Hypothesis). It is also important to understand the individual’s propensity

to commit crime by explaining the social structures that influence this offending, or

more particularly, the diminishing of the important agents of socialisation which shape

human behaviour and encourage conformity.

In addition, there are a range of policing styles that can be employed in

responding to licensed premises (e.g. Enforcement Styles). J. Q. Wilson (1968)

contends that such styles fall into three main categories: service, watchman and

legalistic. However, despite the considerable time since J. Q. Wilson’s observations

(1968), no definitive and unequivocal response style has emerged in the literature as

being the most efficacious when police respond to licensed premises. However, in

achieving a law enforcement objective, often police have an opportunity to partner with

others and such partnering, in the literature, is referred to as Third Party Policing

(Mazerolle & Ransley, 2005). The purpose of these partnerships is to use the

resourcing and legal authority of others to achieve an end better than that which could

be achieved by the police agency alone. In doing so, this ensures that officers act in

ways that are both ethical and efficient in ensuring public safety. Other agencies also

derive significant benefit from such partnering with police, given that they are able to

use the authority of police. referred to as the ‘legal levers’. to effect change (Mazerolle

& Ransley, 2005). The presence of police and other agents with authority is important

64

in and around licensed premises. Routine Activity Theory argues that crime occurs

when three components combine, namely (1) an accessible target, (2) the absence of a

capable guardian who could intervene, and (3) the presence of a motivated offender.

This theory suggests that high visibility policing provides a capable guardian and so

deters offending behaviour.

RQ2 enquires about the level of police officer knowledge of strategies to address

alcohol-related harm both inside and outside licensed premises. Theories outlined

previously also relate to this research question. Theories focusing on the styles of

policing that are employed to effectively address situations characterised by crime or

violence (e.g. Enforcement Styles), provide important knowledge about how to approach

these situations. Still other theories inform decisions about resource allocations,

ensuring that valuable police resources are utilised where and when crime is occurring.

These theories include Intelligence-led Policing and Place Based Theory. CPTED

principles are believed to be important theoretical considerations when understanding

the built environment in and around licensed premises. Note only are they important

from the perspective of licensed premises operators, but police officers also need a clear

knowledge and understanding of the factors which exacerbate harms to both patrons and

responding police. The presence of police, particularly at key times that are correlated

with aggression, is important in preventing violent behaviours (e.g. Routine Activity

Theory). Licensed premises are highly regulated environments and there are regulations

relating to the built environment, hours and nature of service, and the context and

circumstances of service. The theory of Responsive Regulation is therefore an

important contextual consideration. as well as explaining the internal policy imperative

that officers work within.

In terms of the beliefs that police hold that influence the policing of licensed

premises (RQ3), and how effective officers believe strategies are in preventing alcohol-

related harm both inside and outside licensed premises (RQ4), there are a range of

relevant theories previously introduced which relate to these research questions.

Theories which explain the nature and extent of alcohol consumption are important

influences on officer beliefs. Likewise, theories which explain the impact of

consumption on the lowering of inhibitions and the resultant offending behaviours, also

influence police officer beliefs. Social factors, which influence individuals’ decisions to

commit a crime (e.g. Social Strain Theory and Social Disorganisation Theory), are

important contextual factors impacting on the belief systems of police officers. Other

65

theories which explain the built environment of licensed premises (e.g. Situational

Crime Prevention and CPTED Theory), and practical strategies which can be employed

consistent with CPTED principles, are valuable theoretical underpinnings for strategy

development. However, it is not known whether officers have an understanding of the

utility of these principles and strategies. The attitude of police working in the licensed

premises environment to working in partnerships is also an important consideration and

one that will be explored (e.g. Third Party Policing). With regard to the skills police

believe they need to possess to deal with incidents in and around licensed premises

(RQ5), theories which discuss the use and importance of techniques such as

intelligence-led policing and ‘hot spot’ mapping (e.g. Place Based Theory), are useful in

understanding skill levels officers believe they need.

A key research question relates to the barriers which prevent or reduce the

capability of police officers to effectively police licensed premises (RQ6). A key

hypothesis is that there are factors which prevent police from reaching their optimum

level of engagement, and further, that if these barriers were mitigated, police would

have greater potential to reduce alcohol-related harm than they do currently. Theories

which are relevant to the issue of identifying and overcoming these barriers include

those which examine the style of policing relevant to the policing of such premises (e.g.

Enforcement Styles). While there is a dearth of literature on a definitive style for

policing in and around such premises, there are aspects of J. Q. Wilson’s (1968)

categorisations (i.e. service, watchman, legalistic styles) which may be relevant under

certain circumstances. Some of the theories discussed identify that police officers have

little control over key externalities impacting on safety. CPTED deals with the built

environment and Place Based Theory discusses how to identify where crime is

occurring. Whilst these difficulties could be seen as barriers, intuitive officers may

have developed coping strategies to work within existing constraints. In terms of

Responsive Regulation Theory, the legislation and Service policy imperatives will be

examined to identify whether they stymie or enhance officer effectiveness. The

research will explore what officers do when confronted with such obstacles or barriers

whilst policing in and around licensed premises.

The attitude of senior police regarding the knowledge, skills, attitudes and

capacity of police to reduce alcohol-related harm (RQ7) is also an important dimension

of this research. A similar research question also investigates the attitude of those

operating within the liquor industry, in terms of their knowledge of police skills,

66

attitudes, and capacity relevant to licensed premises policing (RQ8). There are a

number of theories which are highly relevant to attitudes of senior police. Some of

these relate to the importance of a highly visible policing presence acting as a deterrent

to crime (e.g. Routine Activity Theory). In this way, the commitment of the senior

executive to ensuring that police are resourced to undertake this high visibility policing

will be a key issue for examination of policing in and around licensed premises. Other

strategies relate to police agencies; commitment to Third Party Policing and the

importance of strong and unequivocal policy (e.g. Responsive Regulation Theory) to

guide police performance. A pivotal role for police at executive levels centres around

monitoring performance. The OPR is a useful tool in this regard and the use of this

strategy in the police operational context relating to licensed premises will be explored.

The research question relating to attitudes of those exclusive of police (RQ8) will be

informed by similar theoretical approaches to those used for senior police (RQ7). In

particular, Third Party Policing will be an extremely important theoretical framework

for consideration. Third Party Policing is an ethical and efficient way of meeting

organisational and community expectations. Such partnerships are also efficient in that

they use resources wisely; often much more can be achieved by amalgamating effort

and leveraging off the regulatory authority of others (legal levers) than can be achieved

by one agency operating in isolation (Mazerolle & Ransley, 2005). The positive effect

could be amplified and community safety may be the winner from this transaction. The

important consideration from this research is whether police at the operational level and

the executive level, as well as the industry stakeholders, understand and utilise these

partnerships, and whether senior police and stakeholders believe operational police have

the capability to use partnerships for effective policing.

There are numerous theories which can be applied to the policing of licensed

premises. Some of these theories are focused at the point at which police engage with

licensed premises and can be considered from the perspective of policing outcomes.

This, in management theory, can be described as ‘public value’. Still other theories are

contextually based and focus at the point at which officers receive their mandate to

engage in certain contexts and in specific ways. These theories relate to what can be

described in theory as the ‘authorising environment’ (Moore, 1995). Still other theories

can be construed as relevant to the acquisition and possession of knowledge, skill and

tangible resources, which officers need to carry out their role in policing licensed

premises, and provide operational capability.

67

3.7 Three Circle Public Value Model

One model has been identified which describes the interaction of the three studies

comprising the overall research approach, identified in Section 3.6. This model,

developed by Moore (1995) and further refined by Alford (2000), is the Three Circle

Public Value Model. Alford (2000) argues that the model, developed from strategic

management theory, is constructed around three main elements. These are:

• the value produced or purposes pursued by the organisation (public value); and/or

• the environment in which the organisation operates (authorising environment);

and/or

• the resources and capabilities with which value is created or purposes are pursued

(operational capability).

The various component parts of the model are presented below in Figure 4 and

discussed in detail in terms of their relevance to the research questions in the following

sections.

Figure 4: Three Circle Public Value Model

Source: Moore (1995)

Authorising

Environment

Public

Value

Operational

Capabilities

68

3.7.1 Public value

Organisations sit on a public-to-private continuum and few, if any, organisations

are purely private or purely public (Alford, 2000). Rather, each organisation has a mix

of public and private characteristics which determine where the organisation sits on this

theoretical continuum. The Three Circle Public Value Model and its component parts

have greatest relevance to public sector organisations; however, aspects are also

relevant to private entities.

From a public sector management perspective, the term ‘public value’ refers to

both private and public outputs or values having regard for the fact that an outcome is

produced for the community. This contrasts with ‘private value’, which denotes the

goods and services produced by a ‘private’ company or entity in return for a commodity

or other benefit. A significant issue which distinguishes private from public value is the

nature of the relationship which exists with the ‘customer’. The private sector

relationship with customers is considerably simpler than that of the relationship that

exists in the public sector. In private sector exchanges, goods or services are exchanged

for a commodity, usually money. In the public sector transaction, the services produced

might be to the detriment of the ‘customer’, such as where prosecutorial action is taken

against someone who breaches the law, or a person might receive a benefit even though

they are not a paying customer of the public sector entity (e.g. overseas tourist obtaining

a policing benefit) (Moore, 1995). Furthermore, often government is not in the business

of providing a service but rather is in the business of imposing obligations (Alford,

2000). It is the responsibility of public sector managers to create public value in

keeping with their responsibilities to the community. In fact if they are not creating

public value, then at best they are operating inefficiently, and at worst corruptly, having

regard for the authorisation that has been given to them by government.

Both Study One and Study Two focus on the ‘public value’ component of the

model. In the case of policing licensed premises the ‘public value’ is ultimately public

safety, although outputs would also be consistent with ensuring that the government

priority of economic prosperity of the industry is met. Essentially the value for the

public is reduction of negative externalities (Alford, 2000). To facilitate this reduction,

strategies could be employed to reduce violence and antisocial behaviour (e.g. proactive

patrolling inside licensed premises) or to provide quicker response times to incidents

(e.g. deployment of increased numbers of officers and police vehicles and changes to

rostering at peak times). The obligation on the police agency is to not only achieve

69

public value but also to do this in a cost efficient manner having regard for the overall

public good. This highlights the challenges in policing, where not only is it important to

reach particular destinations (outcomes), but the journey (outputs) is equally as

important.

3.7.2 Authorising environment

A multitude of factors influence and guide police in the policing or regulatory

activity relating to licensed premises. Within the organisation, these could include

individual senior police officers providing direction, or strategic management

committees which establish organisational priorities. A by-product of these corporate

level deliberations can be strategic documents which articulate key goals or priorities

which, in turn, are developed into operational planning documents. Internal policies

and guidelines also provide advice and guidance to officers undertaking certain tasks.

Study Two of this research focuses on this internal ‘authorising environment’ and

examines a range of issues associated with the degree of influence that is exerted by

senior police on junior officers at the district, regional and corporate levels of the

organisation. External factors in the authorising environment range from the political

(relevant Minister, other Ministers or the Premier of the State), through legislation,

courts, and the media, to the expectations of the community. All provide police with

the legitimacy to undertake their role, and hold them accountable for their efforts and

actions.

It is important to note however, that the demands of the authorising environment

can and do change (Moore, 1995). Such change is particularly relevant in the licensed

premises environment given the ability for isolated incidents and emerging trends to

create public debate and criticism, leading to media interest which in turn leads to

political pressure and governmental action. An example of this is the death of a young

man in 2005, who was killed as a consequence of an assault. His death provided the

impetus for the then Queensland Premier’s much cited 17-point plan for the Brisbane

CBD entertainment precinct (Sandy, 2009) aimed at reducing alcohol-related violence.

70

3.7.3 Operational capability

In the private sector, ‘operational capability’ refers organisational capability and

includes labour, buildings, raw materials, equipment, and other necessities to derive

income or produce a product. While these resources are also required by the public

sector, other intangible resources such as public power and authority are equally

important for public sector entities to achieve their role in providing public benefits, or

in the case of police, reducing negative externalities. This is certainly the case with

police officers performing key roles in terms of regulatory responses to licensed

premises. In such cases, their role is to administer the law and give effect to

government and Service policy. Police leverage off other agencies (e.g. BCC,

Queensland Health and most importantly, OLGR) and co-opt the skills, expertise and

legislative clout of these other government agencies to give effect to public safety

measures. This is referred to in the literature as Third Party Policing (Mazerolle &

Ransley, 2005). The operational capability of the police in such cases is therefore not

only defined by police willingness to engage at licensed premises and to undertake their

regulatory capacities, but it also encapsulates their legislative authority.

There are opportunity costs associated with the policing of licensed premises.

Opportunity costs refer to activities which are undertaken in one domain at the expense

of other activities, thereby recognising that not everything can be given the same

priority or attention. Police resourcing is finite and any increase in proactive

engagement at licensed premises will have a cost in other areas of their role and

function. The challenge for those who set the operational and strategic agendas is to

ensure that an effective and efficient mix of resources is available to achieve public

safety, which is the most significant organisational (and community) imperative.

3.8 Relevance of the model to the program of research

First, while the Three Circle Public Value Model, hereafter referred to as the

model, has applicability to the private sector, it is specifically focused on the public

sector and its focus is on the achievement of a state or an outcome which is referred to

as ‘public value’. Within the context of this research, the public value component of the

model is directly relevant to Study One, through the ambition of ‘public safety’. Study

One examines the knowledge of officers regarding strategies officers perceive as being

effective in policing licensed premises. Officers are also canvassed as to which

71

strategies they employ and the effectiveness of those strategies. The focus of officer

efforts in policing licensed premises is clearly to give effect to public safety. This

operational objective (to facilitate public safety) is also examined in interviews with the

diverse range of participants in Study Two and Study Three. These participants,

including senior police and external stakeholders, recorded consistent views regarding

the QPS role with respect to licensed premises. The key theme to emerge was ‘public

safety’. It is therefore proposed that public value within the context of police officers

policing licensed premises is, in fact, the achievement of activities which are consistent

with public safety outcomes.

Secondly, a key assumption of the research is that there is a range of factors that

potentially inhibit or act as barriers to police achieving an optimum level of engagement

in the policing of licensed premises. The literature refers to the pressure and tension on

contemporary police agencies in terms of resourcing demands and a further assumption

is that a lack of or reduced police operational capability is likely to be a significant

inhibiting factor in police engagement in licensed premises. Study One canvasses the

views of operational police on the nature of and extent to which a range of factors

prevent or act as barriers to the effective policing of licensed premises. Study Two,

which focuses on senior police, examines their views as to those factors acting as

barriers and explores what support, in terms of organisational vision, mission, goal

setting, and resourcing, they provide to optimise operational capability and enable

operational police to achieve public value imperatives (e.g. public safety outcomes in

and around licensed premises).

The third and last key factor, in terms of the relevance of the model to the

program of research, relates to the ‘authorising environment’. Policing in western

democracies has a para-military structure. The literature refers to police agencies as

being structured and that the organisation and individuals within that organisation are

rule-bound. The police organisation operates in an environment rich in mission

statements, strategy documents, legislative frameworks and internal rules, often referred

to as Service policies and procedures (refer to section 2.7.2). In public sector

management theory, the factors which serve to direct, guide, or legislatively enable and

steer public sector organisations is referred to as the ‘authorising environment’ (Moore,

1995). It is assumed that the authorising environment has a strong influence in shaping

the activities of police officers at the operational level generally and in the policing of

licensed premises specifically. Equally, it is assumed that if operational officers are of

72

the view that there are barriers to policing licensed premises, this could be, and is in fact

likely to be, a result of a lack of support from the authorising environment.

3.9 Summary

Although there are a number of models and theories that may be useful in guiding

research in policing licensed premises, the Three Circle Public Value Model (Alford,

2000; Moore, 1995), is the model identified as providing the most appropriate

theoretical fit within the current program of research. The author has not identified any

previous application of this model (i.e. Three Circle Public Value Model) in a policing

context and from this perspective the program of research makes a unique contribution

to the overall body of research on police responses at licensed premises. Despite not

being applied to a policing context previously, it is well suited to integration into the

current program of research as demonstrated in section 3.8.

The model has a key focus on public value, which equates to public safety for the

purposes of this research. Despite the focus on public safety, the other key components

of the model – authorising environment and operational capabilities – are key

considerations in policing generally and in licensed premises policing specifically. The

focus in Study One, around the public value proposition, is also impacted by the extent

to which a strong, synergistic and supportive authorising environment (which can be

both external and internal) is present. Equally, operational capability must be present in

order for public value (public safety) to be realised. Operational capability is

considered broadly within the context of this research to include physical resources (e.g.

radios, accoutrements, motor vehicles) and key capabilities (e.g. knowledge, training,

and skill development).

The model works particularly well, and can be strongly integrated into the current

research, because of its ability to examine the authorising environment and operational

capability from the perspective of both the operational officer and the senior police

manager/leader. In this way Study One uses the model as a lens to examine not only

what operational officers do, but also what the barriers might be to optimum levels of

engagement. Equally, Study Two is able to use the same model to examine the impacts

of the authorising environment and operational capability on the policing of licensed

premises and the corresponding impacts on operational police.

73

The next chapter outlines the specific characteristics of the BCD, in particular,

those relating to the resident and visitor populations and the number and nature of

licensed premises. Characteristics fundamental to the management of the entertainment

precinct will also be examined and discussed. This chapter also explains the research

strategy and discusses this strategy within the context of the model.

74

CHAPTER FOUR: RESEARCH SETTING & STRATEGY

4.1 Introduction …………………………………………… 75

4.2 Characteristics of Brisbane Central District (BCD) ….. 75

4.3 Integration of the studies into the model ……………... 82

4.4 Research strategy ……………………………………... 83

4.5 Summary ……………………………………………… 86

75

4.1 Introduction

Police districts are rarely alike. The main reasons for the differences are the

police to population ratio, geography, demographics, offender characteristics and the

mix of offending behaviours. Other significant factors distinguishing BCD from other

districts include the formal and informal cooperative relationships key officers within

the District have developed with owners of licensed premises and the broader alcohol

industry, and the mix of formal arrangements and agreements which involve the diverse

group of stakeholders involved with the liquor industry more generally in BCD.

This chapter describes these distinguishing characteristics and explains why and

how they make BCD the most appropriate location for this research. This chapter also

describes the research strategy and the methodology for each of the three studies used

for the investigation of police responses to issues involving alcohol related offences

both inside and outside licensed premises. Finally, the chapter discusses the integration

of the three studies into the Three Circle Public Value Model, and the use of the model

to provide a framework for analysis of their interrelationship and relevance to the

policing of licensed premises.

4.2 Characteristics of Brisbane Central District (BCD)

There are a multitude of factors that differentiate BCD from other police districts

in Queensland, including BCD organisational structure; police officer staffing levels;

demographics, including the unusually high visitor to resident ratio; the number and

density of licensed premises; patron numbers; and the mix of offending behaviours (e.g.

crime, violence, antisocial behaviours) prosecuted by police. Furthermore, the set of

strategies and formal agreements which coexist in this District are a significant

consideration in terms of establishing the distinctive character of BCD. These

arrangements include implementation of Liquor Enforcement and Proactive Strategies

(LEAPS), introducing 3 a.m. lockout provisions. the Valley Liquor Accord (VLA), and

implementing the Drink Safe Precinct (DSP) Pilot. Together these characteristics and

initiatives create a unique environment for policing licensed premises and add to the

complexity of policing the District’s vibrant night-time economy.

76

4.2.1 Organisational structure of the QPS and BCD

In terms of the structure of the Queensland Police Service, policing within

Queensland is divided up into Divisions (police stations), Districts (such as Brisbane

Central District) and Regions. There are eight Police Regions which are geographically

sited throughout the State, as well a number of Specialist Commands which are located

in Brisbane, Queensland.

BCD is one of 31 Police Districts within Queensland and is one of four Districts

within the Metropolitan North Police Region of the Queensland Police Service.

4.2.2 Personnel in BCD

As at 1st January, 2009, BCD had a staffing complement of 430 personnel – 377

police officers and 53 staff members. Staff members are ‘unsworn’ members of the

QPS who do not have police powers and responsibilities. Although unsworn members,

otherwise referred to as staff members, provide a necessary support to police officers,

they are not subject to investigation as part of this research. Staff members can include

Administrative Officers, Station Client Service Officers, Assistant Intelligence Officers

and Police Liaison Officers, and these roles do not directly deal with licensed premises.

Within BCD there are two Police Divisions, namely Brisbane City Station and

Fortitude Valley Police Station. There are 184 police officers attached to Brisbane City

Station and 120 attached to Fortitude Valley Police Station. An additional compliment

of 73 police officers provide District functions including the leadership and command

cells as well as specialist support. Specialist functions relevant to this research include

Crime Manager, District Crime Prevention Coordinator, Liquor Enforcement and

Proactive Strategies (LEAPS), Criminal Investigation Branch (CIB), Child Protection

Investigation Unit (CPIU), and other specialist officers.

4.2.3 Residential and visitor populations

There are considerable difficulties in attempting to determine residential

populations within BCD. The most accurate population data is derived from the

Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS); however, the geographical boundaries for the

Brisbane CBD do not align with policing boundaries for BCD. Other issues which

make it difficult to determine residential population is the high rate of growth that has

occurred since 1996. The ABS indicate that the population between 1996 and 2001

77

increased by 8% per year, or 32%, over this five-year period in BCD. Arguably, since

the Census in 2006, there have been significant increases in high density residential and

short term accommodation infrastructure developments, many of which aim to capture

the tourist, international student and other markets, which are not measured in Census

data. The 2006 Census data indicates that the population in BCD was, at that time,

55,959. Having regard for population growth of 8% per annum this equates to a

residential population of approximately 65,745 as at early 2009. Using the same

methodology which was used to determine resident population in the District, in 2006

the resident population in Brisbane City Division was 31,436, projected to

approximately 39,600 in early 2009, and 24,523 in the Fortitude Valley Division

projected to approximately 26,144 in early 2009.

4.2.4 Number and types of licensed premises

As with most capital cities in Australia, Brisbane has a vibrant nightlife. This

environment is strongly focused on nightclubs, hotels and other licensed premises in the

BCD area. Table 2 lists the range of license types within the District as at 1st January,

2009. The large number of premises, the diversity and types of premises, the number of

alcohol consumers, the extent of alcohol consumption, and the corresponding level of

offending behaviour, all poses significant issues for police.

Table 2: Liquor licence types in Brisbane Central District

License Type n

General Licence 82 Club Licence 22 On-Premises (Meals) 244 On-Premises (Cabaret) 41 On-Premises (Presentation) 5 On-Premises (Function) 3 On-Premises (Transport) 10 On-Premises (Training/Education) 1 On-Premises (Other Activity) 5 Residential 31 Special Facility 12 Limited 12 Producer/Wholesaler 11 Detached Bottle Shop 23 Trading Post Midnight 215 Trading Post 1 a.m. 155 Trading Post 3 a.m. 71 Adult Entertainment Permits 10 Total Licensed Premises 515

Source: Office of Liquor and Gaming Regulation (2009).

78

4.2.5 Number of patrons in licensed premises

The geographical area encompassed by BCD, according to QPS statistics, totals

20.1 km2 divided between the two police divisions (Brisbane City Division and

Fortitude Valley Division). Although small when compared to other districts, BCD is

arguably amongst the most complex to police due to a number of factors. Both

Divisions within the District are significant entertainment hubs where the residential

population underestimates the true nature of the policing challenge (See Figure 1 – BCD

Map). An estimated 60,000 to 70,000 patrons, additional to the residential population,

frequent the various licensed premises within the Brisbane CBD and Fortitude Valley

areas on a Friday and Saturday nights. It is estimated that approximately 1.2 million

visitors frequent the CBD’s Queen Street Mall area every 24 hours and it is further

estimated that 800,000 vehicles pass through the CBD during any 24-hour period (BCD

Environmental Scan, 2007).

4.2.6 Offences prosecuted

The crime, violence and antisocial behaviour generally associated with alcohol

use and misuse are dealt with in other areas of this thesis (refer to Section 2.3).

However, it is this mix of offending behaviours which define policing in BCD. The

reason for this is that this relatively small District (in terms of geography) has equal to

or higher rates of alcohol-related offending than any other district in the QPS.

Given the distinctive nature of BCD, particularly in terms of the intensity and

vibrancy of the night-time economy, it is not surprising that there are significant

prosecutions for a range of offences which are often associated with alcohol

consumption. Such offences include, but are not limited to, assaults, opportunistic

robberies, and public nuisance types of offences. Table 3 highlights the quantum of

offences or crimes detected or prosecuted by police in BCD compared to Queensland as

a whole.

79

Table 3: Offences in Brisbane Central District compared to State 2003-10 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10

Murder

BCD as % of State 6.7% 5.7% 1.8% 2.0% 0.0% 2.0% 1.8%

Brisbane Central District (N) 4 3 1 1 0 1 1

Queensland (N) 60 53 55 51 51 47 56

Attempted Murder

BCD as % of State 2.6% 5.2% 1.5% 0.0% 3.2% 2.6% 1.7%

Brisbane Central District (N) 3 5 1 0 2 2 1

Queensland (N) 116 96 68 67 62 79 60

Total Assaults (Excluding Sexual)

BCD as % of State 6.1% 5.7% 6.4% 6.1% 6.6% 5.8% 6.3%

Brisbane Central District (N) 1 159 1 097 1 275 1 183 1 267 1 148 1 302

Queensland (N) 19 012 19 268 19 835 19 505 19 327 19 400 20 513

Total Robbery (Armed/Unarmed)

BCD as % of State 11.0% 6.9% 9.2% 9.7% 8.9% 8.1% 9.7%

Brisbane Central District (N) 216 125 182 174 154 152 177

Queensland (N) 1 959 1 800 1 980 1 793 1 738 1 871 1 815

Unlawful Use of Motor Vehicle (Includes Attempted)

BCD as % of State 3.8% 3.8% 3.9% 3.8% 2.7% 2.5% 2.8%

Brisbane Central District (N) 538 506 129 426 272 243 251

Queensland (N) 14 267 13 432 3 331 11 239 9 965 9 525 8 890

Public Nuisance

BCD as % of State 10.1% 12.5% 15.8% 15.6% 13.9% 13.2% 13%

Brisbane Central District (N) 1 235 1 997 2 928 3 461 3 6172 3 629 3 806

Queensland (N) 12 260 15 933 18 590 22 119 26 112 27 530 29 323

Drugs (Includes - Trafficking, Possess/Supply/Produce Dangerous Drugs and Other)

BCD as % of State 6.0% 6.5% 6.9% 6.6% 6.7% 6.2% 5%

Brisbane Central District (N) 2 661 2 947 3 323 3 134 3 315 2 790 2 175

Queensland (N) 44 610 45 127 48 360 47 815 49 346 45 087 43 195

Prostitution

BCD as % of State 86.1% 75.4% 54.8% 67.8% 53.4% 34.7% 26.7%

Brisbane Central District (N) 833 362 329 407 204 105 77

Queensland (N) 968 480 600 600 382 302 288

Source: QPS Annual Report 2003-2004 to 2009-20010 & Statistical Review 2003-2004 to 2009-20010.

4.2.7 Liquor Enforcement and Proactive Strategies (LEAPS)

An important feature of this research is to compare and contrast knowledge and

capability of generalist police with that of specialist police operating under the LEAPS

initiative and attached to the LEAPS Unit. The purpose of LEAPS is to develop and

maintain a specialist capability, with officers having both higher levels of knowledge of

the Liquor Act, and greater capability to undertake more complex Liquor Act

prosecutions than generalist officers. LEAPS officers work with both the government

(including OLGR and other stakeholders) and the liquor industry, with the aim of

reducing alcohol-related crime, violence and antisocial behaviour. One of the strengths

80

of the LEAPS approach is that it has a significant focus on collecting, recording and

analysing crime data. This data is used firstly to inform policing practice from an

evidence basis, and secondly when making a case to OLGR for prosecutorial action or

other restrictive regulatory approaches.

The LEAPS initiative is a significant strategy utilised within BCD to develop

productive relationships with stakeholders in the alcohol industry. It is also valuable in

terms of coordinating activity and providing a specialist repository of knowledge for

generalist officers who may believe that the Liquor Act should be the domain of a

specialist body of knowledge outside the realm of the general duties officer.

4.2.8 3 a.m. lockout provisions

A further initiative that has both changed the night-time economy and defined the nature

of its operation in the BCD has been the 3 a.m. lockout provisions. In 2005, the then

Queensland Government implemented a 17-point plan aimed at reducing and mitigating

alcohol-related crime, violence and antisocial behaviour within the Brisbane CBD. The

impetus for this strategy was the assault and robbery of a young man which ultimately

led to him dying as a result of injuries he sustained (Sandy, 2009). One of the 17-point

plan strategies was the introduction of 3 a.m. lockout provisions. This strategy was

implemented on the 1st April, 2005 in response to growing concerns about alcohol-

related violence and disorder associated with patrons migrating between licensed

premises in the early hours of the morning (Palk et al., 2007a). The lockout provisions

effectively prevent a patron from moving between late-night licensed premises between

3 a.m. and 5 a.m. While patrons are free to leave licensed premises after 3 a.m., there is

no opportunity for them to enter any other premises, including the premises they left.

This programme has been evaluated in Queensland, Australia. In one study, it was

found that alcohol-related offences, particularly those related to disturbances and sexual

offences, were significantly reduced following the introduction of the lockout policy. It

was also reported that other offences such as those relating to property, stealing and

assault were reduced, although such reductions were not significant (Palk et al., 2007a).

In another study, it was specifically found that the 3 a.m. lockout provisions reduced

significantly the number of violent incidents inside licensed premises by half. Despite

these impressive results the findings did not reveal any effect on violent incidents

outside such premises (Mazerolle, White, Ransley, & Ferguson, 2012).

81

4.2.9 Valley Liquor Accord (VLA)

The liquor precinct in Brisbane City and Fortitude Valley is not specifically

geographically defined. This presents a significant challenge for coordinating efforts to

address problems associated with alcohol provision at licensed premises. For example,

BCD did not have a dedicated full-time LEAPS Unit until the mid to late 2000s. The

Valley Alcohol Management Partnership (VAMP) was originally formed in 2004 and

later developed into the Valley Liquor Accord (VLA) within the Fortitude Valley area.

The VLA is a voluntary collaboration between a broad range of stakeholders including

government (both State and Local), local licensees, community organisations and the

Fortitude Valley Chamber of Commerce. The VLA has a strategic plan. Its four priority

areas for action form the cornerstones of the strategy and includes patron education,

transport issues, impact of off-premises consumption of alcohol, and management of the

impact of illicit drug issues. The Valley (Fortitude Valley) Entertainment Precinct

became Australia’s first designated Special Entertainment Precinct in July 2006. The

effect of this designation is that the Brisbane City Council and the State Government

amended noise and planning laws to create a Precinct which would balance the needs of

the live music venues (often licensed premises) with the needs of residents and other

commercial operators (Brisbane City Council, 2012).

4.2.10 Drink Safe Precinct (DSP) Pilot

The Queensland Government, in response to the Parliamentary Law, Justice and

Safety Committee report on alcohol-related violence, committed to undertake pilot trials

involving of a suite of initiatives including enhanced, targeted and flexible police

responses, improved coordination of security, improved transport and traffic control,

and coordinated processes between community groups, police and premises. These

trials were named the Drink Safe Precinct (DSP) or Safer Entertainment Precinct (SEP)

pilot in the Fortitude Valley, Surfers Paradise and Townsville areas of Queensland,

Australia. The pilot trials in the three sites commenced at various dates in early

December 2010 for an initial period of 12 months. Funds were allocated to the QPS

($3.141M) to increase the number officers on overtime at peak times (such as Friday

and Saturday nights) within declared DSP sites. A further and significant commitment

was the allocation of funding ($1.126M) to a non-government entity to provide a ‘Chill

82

Out Zone’ similar to what has historically been provided on the Gold Coast in

Queensland. This initiative specifically aims to engage at-risk people (usually young

intoxicated patrons) with allied health professions who can provide social support and

brief health interventions at the local precinct level.

The choice of Fortitude Valley as a pilot site for the trial of this initiative is

significant for this research because not only did it incorporate the large number of

licensed premises within Fortitude Valley, but it also confirmed the characterisation of

the area as having unique challenges in terms of policing licensed premises.

Furthermore, the trial provided the potential for additional resources, many of whom

were QPS personnel, during the trial period to address issues associated with

intoxication and licensed premises.

4.3 Integration of the studies into the model

As indicated in Chapter Three, the Three Circle Public Value Model (Alford,

2000; Moore, 1995) is particularly relevant as a framework for the research in this

thesis. For Study One, which focuses on the individual officer and their attitudes,

beliefs and experiences in policing licensed premises, it has relevance to the ‘public

value’ component part of the model. In terms of police operating in a licensed premises

environment, it is the actions of the officers in addressing alcohol-related harm and

public safety that accords with the notion of ‘public value’. Clearly there is a

significant linkage between the ‘Authorising Environment’ and ‘Operational

Capability’. This link reflects the actuality that operational capability is built with the

congruence and support of the authorising environment. The model, as reflected in

Figure 5, identifies this interrelationship.

Study Two focuses on the ‘Authorising Environment’ component of the model by

directing attention on the views of senior officers at the district, regional and corporate

levels of the organisation. This focus of the model is particularly important given that it

explains why and how officers are directed in their policing efforts that focus on

licensed premises. Study Three, which canvasses the views of external stakeholders

from government, non-government organisations and business community, encapsulates

all three circles of the model, namely Authorising Environment, Operational Capability

and Value (particularly, Public Value). The views of these broad stakeholders are

83

directed at critically assessing their perceptions of police performance in terms of

aspects relating to the three facets of the model (refer to Figure 5).

Figure 5: Relevance of studies to the Three Circle Public Value Model

4.4 Research strategy

This study is concerned with investigating, amongst other things, the level of

knowledge and the application of strategies used to address alcohol-related harm at

licensed premises. The initial formulation of the research problem was directed at the

knowledge that police officers had in relation to policing licensed premises, as well as

the application of strategies by police in addressing alcohol-related violence and

disorder. Questions in relation to this research will form the basis of Study One.

It was determined that key personnel with policy and strategy-setting

responsibilities would also need to be canvassed. This then led to the development of

the strategy to interview relevant personnel at the district, regional and corporate levels

of the Service. The commissioned officers and senior executive members of the Service

have responsibility for Service policy setting and implementation which are crucial in

terms of determining a broad whole-of-Service strategy to achieve operational

objectives. This high-level strategy is articulated to operational officers at the divisional

level police station managers. To ascertain the views of these senior managers in regard

to capability of officers to respond effectively, Study Two undertook a series of face-to-

Study 2 Study 1

Study 3

Authorising Environment

Operational Capability

Public Value

84

face interviews with key personnel at each of the previously identified organisational

levels.

The Three Circle Public Value Model provides the most theoretical framework

for the research being undertaken. In considering this model and examining its key

focus on public value, it was evident that it would be necessary to identify stakeholders

external of police to canvass their views on the value produced by police. These

stakeholders were drawn from the business sector (e.g. licensees, security providers,

licensed premises employees and private business interests exclusive of licensed

premises), non-government (e.g. benevolent services and other help groups) and

government sector (e.g. OLGR, BCC, Queensland Fire and Rescue Authority [QFRA],

Queensland Ambulance Service [QAS]). A questionnaire canvassing the views of these

stakeholders forms the basis of Study Three. The use of the three studies provides a

valuable methodological approach which allows for data triangulation and validation of

the research findings.

4.4.1 Study One – Police practitioners

Study One aimed to determine what officers know, what they believe and what

they do with respect to the policing of alcohol-related crime, violence and antisocial

behaviour inside and outside licensed premises. The research also identified the barriers

which prevent police from undertaking their roles given that licensed premises can be

perceived as inhospitable and problematic contexts to police. The survey location

chosen for Study One was BCD within the QPS. The main reason for selecting this

location is that it is a dynamic nightlife precinct within the State of Queensland, with an

unusually high number and concentration of licensed premises. The quantum of

licensed premises (over 500) and the high numbers of people coming into the City and

Fortitude Valley to patronage these premises areas makes this a meaningful location to

examine police responses.

The survey involved a 38 question (over 170 items) self-completed questionnaire

(see Appendix 1). QPS personnel were informed that their participation was strictly

voluntary, that their confidentiality was assured, and that any data collected would be

unidentifiable and purely for research purposes.

85

4.4.2 Study Two – Police management

Study Two aimed to identify the perceptions of senior police officers at the

district, regional and corporate levels of the QPS on a range of issues, particularly those

relating to performance of operational police in and around licensed premises. It also

examined the impact their role and views had on operational officers when policing

alcohol-related incidents both inside and outside licensed premises. The interviews

conducted as part of Study Two involved a representative group from three key areas

responsible for operational and strategic policy direction setting in the QPS. The

qualitative study was carried out within the framework of a purposive sampling, focused

interview and thematic analysis approach. Purposive sampling techniques (Denzin &

Lincoln, 2005; Guba & Lincoln, 1989) involve the targeting of interview subjects. The

rationale for this was the specific nature of the investigation and the limited range of

appropriate interview subjects in key policy and strategy setting levels of the

organisation. The officers sampled were from district, regional and whole-of-

organisation levels (see Appendix 2). These individuals within the QPS are key to

setting the direction in terms of the nature of policing that occurs within licensed

premises and the outcomes that are desired. Any examination of the strategies

employed by police at licensed premises would not be complete or comprehensive

unless organisational policy setting strategic mission, vision and values are examined in

conjunction with operational performance.

Although the sample size was not large in number, it was a comprehensive

sample as opposed to a representative one. There is significant organisational difficulty

in accessing senior personnel to conduct face-to-face interviews. However, all officers

(n=11), including the Commissioner and two Deputy Commissioners participated

(100% response). All interviews were voluntary. Confidentiality was maintained by

attributing comments to a rank and position as opposed to naming the officer directly.

4.4.3 Study Three – External stakeholders

Study Three identified, from an external stakeholder’s perspective, their

understanding of the police role in policing licensed premises. The sample of external

stakeholders were also surveyed in terms of their views as to the appropriateness of

strategies utilised by police and the effectiveness of police efforts to address alcohol-

related harms within a licensed premises context. It is important to the research to

86

examine the views of external stakeholders who are involved in regulating the licensed

premises environment. A variety of representative stakeholders were considered

relevant for the purpose of the study. These stakeholders included licensed premises

(licensees, licensed premises managers, security providers), OLGR, QAS, QFRS, BCC,

as well as the Brisbane City and Valley Chamber of Commerce (see Appendix 3). A

total of 12 participants indicated their willingness to be interviewed.

The District Officer at BCD was consulted concerning the stakeholders of

primary relevance to the service in order to identify appropriate representatives to be

interviewed. Although consultation with the District Officer identified many of the

eventual interviewees, independent inquiries were made to identify additional

appropriate individuals capable of value-adding to this research. These independent

inquiries also elicited potential interviewees who were approached to participate. The

selection of the participants was through a non-randomised (targeted) sampling process.

4.5 Summary

This chapter has identified those factors which make BCD an appropriate setting

for investigation from the perspective of the policing of licensed premises. These

factors include the large numbers of patrons who are visitors to rather than residents of

BCD and the number and density of licensed premises in BCD. It has also outlined

those characteristics which make BCD challenging from a policing licensed premises

perspective. As such this area makes a worthy site for examination given the issues and

the potential for generalisability to other areas around the State and other policing

jurisdictions Australia-wide.

This chapter identified and discussed the overall approach to the research. The

methodology utilised for this program of research involved three studies: (1) directed at

operational officers (Study One), (2) directed at senior officers (management) who are

responsible for strategic and operational policy-setting (Study Two), and (3) relevant

external stakeholders from a diversity of government, business and non-government

sectors (Study Three).

Chapter Five discusses the rationale and methodology specific to Study One.

This study relates to a comprehensive and predominately quantitative questionnaire

targeted at police officers working within BCD of the QPS. Similar rationale and

87

methodology discussions relevant to Study Two and Three will be discussed and further

examined in Chapters Six and Seven.

88

CHAPTER FIVE (STUDY ONE): POLICE PRACTICE, KNOWLEDGE AND

BELIEFS IN POLICING LICENSED PREMISES

5.1 Introduction …………………………………………………. 89

5.2 Research questions ………………………………………….. 89

5.3 Method ……………………………………………………… 90

5.4 Results ………………………………………………………. 96

5.5 Discussion …………………………………………………... 131

5.5 Summary ……………………………………………………. 139

89

5.1 Introduction

The previous chapter outlined the broad methodological approach of the research.

In particular the inter-relationship between each of the studies was discussed and

explained in terms of the theoretical framework. This chapter identifies that the data

gathering tool used was a comprehensive questionnaire focused predominately on

quantitative questioning. Although there were some aspects involving qualitative

designs, the study aimed to understand the practices, knowledge, beliefs, strategies

employed, skill and training levels and barriers and impediments associated with police

working and dealing with alcohol-related incidents in and around licensed premises.

This chapter specifically identifies issues associated with the practice, knowledge

and beliefs in responding to alcohol-related incidents both inside and outside licensed

premises within the Brisbane Central District (BCD). A significant focus of this first

study is to examine and quantify the extent of officer knowledge with respect to the

strategies which have been shown to be effective in managing alcohol-related incidents.

This chapter also discusses other areas of research focus relevant to Study One.

This includes the investigation of strategies which officers utilise in policing both inside

and outside licensed premises. The chapter also examines the skill levels of officers and

the level of officer training provided. The source of officer knowledge and skill is

likewise examined, together with officer attitudes to the barriers which restrict or limit

these officers from undertaking more activity in the policing of licensed premises.

Lastly, the chapter discusses the attitude of participants with respect to partnerships with

other sectors involved in licensed premises. In particular, the success of these

partnerships is a key theme which connects all three studies.

5.2 Research questions

The research questions specifically relevant to this chapter are:

Research Question 1

What is the nature and extent of the police intervention concerning the policing of

alcohol-related matters both inside and outside licensed premises?

90

Research Question 2

What is the level of police knowledge of strategies to address alcohol-related

harm concerning licensed premises?

Research Question 3

What are the beliefs that police hold relevant to the policing of licensed premises?

Research Question 4

How effective do police believe strategies are in preventing alcohol-related harm

inside and outside licensed premises?

Research Question 5

What are the skills police believe they need to possess to deal with incidents

involving alcohol inside and outside licensed premises?

Research Question 6

What are the barriers which prevent or reduce the capability of police to

effectively manage alcohol-incidents relating to licensed premises?

5.3 Method

The research method in this study involved a cross-sectional approach utilising a

comprehensive questionnaire which was disseminated to all police officers operating in

BCD. This questionnaire predominately used quantitative questioning (e.g. Likert

scales); however, there was, to a lesser degree, a range of qualitative (open ended)

questions within the survey questionnaire, which were designed to explore the

knowledge levels of officers.

5.3.1 Ethical clearance

Ethical clearance for data collection for Study One was gained from the

Queensland University of Technology Human Research Committee (QUT Reference:

08000682). As part of the internal approval process within the QPS it was necessary to

gain approval from the QPS Research Committee and as such an application was made

to that Committee and approval subsequently was obtained.

91

5.3.2 Participants

A total of 254 questionnaires were returned from participants, giving a response

rate of 74.9%. Of the responses (n=254) completed, 207 participants were male (81.5%)

and 47 were females (18.5%). The overall breakdown of QPS employees based on

gender is male (n=7668, 74.9%) and female (n=2569, 25.1%). In terms of rank, there

were 199 Constables/Senior Constables (78.4%), 50 Sergeant/Senior Sergeants (19.7%),

and 5 commissioned officers (2.0%). The overall breakdown of QPS employees based

on rank is 6435 Constables/Senior Constables (64.5%), 3029 Sergeant/Senior Sergeants

(30.8%), and 369 commissioned officers (3.7%).

The participants came from a diversity of roles within the District, including

general duties (n=153, 60.2%), investigative duties (n=32, 12.6%), Tactical Crime

Squad/Central District Support Unit (n=22, 8.7%), intelligence (n=6, 2.4%), crime

prevention (n=4, 1.4%), Liquor Enforcement and Proactive Strategies unit (n=3, 1.2%),

or other specialist areas (n=34, 13.3%) (refer to Table 4 for a more detailed

breakdown). Broader QPS numbers and percentages of employees based on job role

was not facilitated as comparisons exclusive of District level are not relevant.

Table 4: Demographic profile of sample Gender n %

Male 202 79.5 Female 46 18.1 Unknown 6 2.4 Total 254 100.0

Employment Type

Constable/Senior Constable 192 75.6 Sergeant/Senior Sergeant 50 19.7 Commissioned Officer 5 2.0 Other 1 0.4 Missing 6 2.4 Total 254 100.0

Job Role

General duties 153 60.2 Investigative duties 32 12.6 TCS/CDSU 22 8.7 Intelligence 6 2.4 Crime prevention 4 1.6 LEAPS Unit 3 1.2 Other specialist areas 25 9.8 Missing 9 3.5 Total 254 100.0

92

Participants ranged between 22 years and 56 years of age (M=35.6 years).

Officers reported that they had between 0.16 years and 35 years of service and the mean

length of service was 9.3 years, although 52% reported less than 8 years of service

(refer to Table 5).

Table 5: Mean scores for age and experience of the sample Age n Minimum Maximum Mean S.D.

Years 254 22 56 35.63 6.855

Experience

Years of service 254 0.16 35.0 9.3428 7.99846

5.3.3 Procedure

The survey questionnaire was developed drawing upon work of Findlay et al.

(2000, 2002) and K. L. Smith et al. (2001) with adaptations by Palk (2008) (refer to

Section 4.3.3). The survey instrument was developed initially in draft and then

reviewed through the formation of a critical review team involving the principal

researcher and academic supervisors. Pilot testing of the questionnaire was conducted

through a series of interviews between the principal researcher and a number of senior

QPS officers (n=3). It should be noted that these individuals did not participate further

in the formal research. Suggestions for changes and inclusions were made before the

document was further pilot tested with officers of various ranks and levels (n=3) as well

as those on the QPS Research Committee (n=8). The main purpose of the pilot testing

was to ensure that the instrument was clear, unambiguous and easily understood by the

officers who would be invited to complete the survey. Feedback from this process

revealed a number of areas requiring modifications. Pilot testing the instrument also led

to methodological refinements in the areas of clearance and confidentiality, literacy,

comprehension, sequencing and duration (length) of the survey.

Personnel were informed that their participation was strictly voluntary and that

their confidentiality was assured, and that any data collected would be unidentifiable

and purely for research purposes.

5.3.4 Materials

Two forms of data collection (quantitative and qualitative) were used to derive

the data necessary to facilitate Study One. Quantitative questions were the dominant

form and were particularly useful in examining the extent to which participants policed

93

licensed premises. However, qualitative open-ended questions were used to gauge the

level of participant knowledge of effective strategies as well as the origins of their

knowledge and skill to police licensed premises. These questions also facilitated

comparisons in participant attitudes and experiences between policing inside to outside

licensed premises.

The limited research that exists that specifically deals with police intervention in

alcohol-related matters did inform the development of the questionnaire relevant to

Study One. In particular, three studies were utilised as a basis upon which the

questionnaire was developed. The first such study, Findlay et. al. (2000) investigated

the management of alcohol-related incidents. This study, which utilised police-activity

log data capture, showed that police experience varying degrees of difficulty when

responding to alcohol-related incidents. The use of questioning dealing with police

identified degrees of difficulty in dealing with a range of given situations, police officer

perceptions of locations affecting difficulty, police perceptions on extraneous factors

adding to difficulty, and likely actions taken by police when dealing with intoxicated

persons, were all influential in the formulation of the questionnaire for Study One.

Findlay et al. (2002) was a further study which informed the development of the

questionnaire, particularly in relation to questioning around prosecutions of low-level

end user (alcohol) offences, as opposed to higher order offences focused on the supplier

of alcohol. The focus of the research in relation to the Findlay et al. (2002) study

related to an exploration and, in fact, a finding, that police officers are significantly

more likely to take enforcement action against low-level offences than higher order

ones.

The final study to inform the development of the questionnaire was K. L. Smith

et al. (2001), which focused on police knowledge and attitudes regarding crime, the

responsible service of alcohol and a proactive alcohol policing strategy. This study was

influential in two key domains. One domain related to the knowledge (or belief) by

police as to the proportion of what they respond to operationally that relates to alcohol.

A question to explore officer beliefs in this regard was incorporated into the

questionnaire. The other domain related to the knowledge of the Liquor Act. In the K.

L. Smith et al. (2001) study officers were ‘tested’ on their knowledge of the responsible

service of alcohol provisions of the NSW Liquor Act. This was the basis for broader

questioning to be incorporated into the questionnaire in Study One relating to self-

identified knowledge of the entire Liquor Act, not merely those provisions relating to

94

responsible service of alcohol. In the case of Findlay et. al. (2000, 2002), the questions

utilised and applied to the questionnaire in Study One were modified to include

additional responses which were informed by the broader literature. The response

scales (i.e. Likert scale responses) were retained as in the original research. This will

allow comparisons to be made by other researchers; however, comparisons between the

research and this program are not a research objective. A comprehensive assessment of

the various sources that were utilised to derive the questionnaire are provided at

Annexure Two.

Finally, the other key influencing factor in the development of the questionnaire

was the theoretical framework chosen (i.e. the Three Circle Public Value Model). This

model was helpful in that it initially directed focus at the public value part of the

framework. Therefore questions directed at what officers’ level of knowledge was, and

their beliefs in terms of their skill levels, which in turn leads to officer activity in

policing licensed premises, was a key focus. The model, together with the literature,

also was instructive when it came to designing the other key components of the research

around the degree to which officers feel supported and the potential barriers which may

exist which prevent them realising their optimum level of policing capacity. In this

way, the authorising environment (i.e. rules, regulations, legislation and service

procedures as well as the commitment of senior officers) was an important

consideration to explore. Equally, the degree to which operational capability exists (i.e.

training, physical resourcing, time, etc.), was also a key consideration. The theoretical

framework was therefore important in ensuring that these factors were explored.

Response rates for voluntary questionnaires in policing environments are often

characterised by low completion rates. At the outset this was identified as a potential

risk and strategies were implemented to address this vulnerability. A number of key

strategies were implemented. A detailed email was sent out from the principal

researcher to all potential survey recipients and this was followed up by a senior officer

speaking to potential participants, prior to the dissemination of the questionnaire. The

questionnaire was delivered to all work units in the BCD in hard copy and a senior non-

commissioned officer (Senior Sergeant) was tasked with their physical collection, again

at the work unit level. Importantly, strategies to ensure anonymity were developed and

employed.

95

5.3.5 Data analysis

The returned questionnaires were collated and quantitative data was entered and

analysed utilising the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) (Version 17). In the

case of the qualitative information derived from the questionnaires, these were recorded,

coded and analysed using a thematic analysis process. The process adopted was to

categorise participants’ responses into major coded themes without preconceived ideas

(Corbin & Strauss, 1990). The participants’ responses were re-read by the interviewer

(research assistant) a number of times utilising a qualitative content analytic approach

that was both comparative and constant (Strauss, 1987; Strauss & Corbin, 1997). This

allowed identification of the recurring major themes.

Thematic analysis (Van Manen, 1990) was then used to identify both major and

minor themes within the participants’ responses on the questionnaire, and the principal

researcher then compared the responses from the research assistant to the thematic

analysis outcomes (major and minor themes) to ensure integrity of the results (e.g. inter-

rater reliability).

5.3.5.1 Treatment of missing data

Analysis of the responses identified that there were limited missing data. In the

case of demographic information such as gender, the missing data (n=6) were dealt with

by removing these responses from the analysis. In other cases where data were missing

relating to an item, the missing data were given the sample’s mean response for that

item. Analysis revealed that it was random, meaning that there was not any identifiable

trend indicating that participants were attempting to avoid particular questions.

Proportionate with the quantum of responses, the missing data occurred at very low

rates with the vast majority of participants recording 100% item responses.

5.3.5.2 Between-group tests

Independent t-tests and chi-square analyses were undertaken to determine if

participant groups were statistically different from each other. The independent t-test

makes use of Levene's Test (Levene, 1960) for Equality of Variances as an inferential

96

statistic to assess the equality of variances in different samples. Levene’s Test checks

the variances of the two groups, in order to decide whether the assumption is supported

or not. As such, a suite of independent sample t-tests were conducted to assess

differences on particular variables across different participant groups (e.g. role and

attendance at licensed premises’ incidents). Additionally, chi-square tests were

undertaken where appropriate to determine whether statistical differences existed within

categorical data groups. Pearson’s r correlations were implemented to determine

significance between continuous variables and point-biserial correlations for categorical

data (* = .05, ** = .01).

Responses to Question 4 were recoded into two groups: (1) general duties and (2)

specialist areas. There were no significant differences found for any variables between

general duties and specialist area participants. Additionally, independent t-tests were

used to assess for differences in mean instrument scores between the attendances by

participants to incidents inside and outside licensed premises over the past six months.

No significant differences were found. The responses to Questions 12 and 13 were also

recoded into two groups: (1) attended five incidents or less over the past six months and

(2) attended more than five incidents over the past six months. No significant

differences were found for any mean instrument scores between attendance levels for

both inside and outside licensed premises.

5.4 Results

5.4.1 Police practice

5.4.1.1 Intervention inside and outside licensed premises

Research Question 1 is concerned with the nature and extent of the police activity

inside and outside licensed premises within BCD. Survey participants were asked how

often they had attended any type of incident in licensed premises over the past six

months. Participants were asked to record their response using a 6-point Likert scale.

A small proportion (n=19, 7.5%) indicated that they had not attended to any type of

incident in licensed premises in the preceding six months. As highlighted in Table 6, of

the officers who had responded to such incidents, the largest proportion reported

attending more than 20 incidents in the last six months, with a further 22.8% indicating

97

that they had attended such incidents between 10 and 20 times. The lowest response

occurred with those visiting licensed premises between 16–20 times (n=26, 10.2%).

Participants were also asked a similar question: How often they had attended to

any type of incident outside a licensed premise over the past six months. A small

proportion (n=15, 5.9%) indicated that they had not attended to any type of incident

outside licensed premises in the preceding six months. The largest proportion of the

sample reported attending over 20 incidents outside a licensed premise over the last six

months (n=142, 55.9%) and the next most frequent response was 16–20 times (n=34,

13.4%). The effect of this was that 69.3% of the participants reported attending 16

times or over in the last six months. In contrast, the lowest response occurred with

those visiting licensed premises between 1–5 times (n=17, 6.7%).\

Table 6: Frequency of attendance inside and outside licensed premises Inside

Licensed Premises

Outside

Licensed Premises

Category n % n %

Never 19 7.5 15 5.9

1-5 39 15.4 17 6.7

6-10 44 17.3 21 8.3

11-15 32 12.6 25 9.8

16-20 26 10.2 34 13.4

Over 20 94 37.0 142 55.9

Total 254 100.0 254 100.0

Although there are considerably more men than women working within the

survey area, the analysis of the responses indicated that males are significantly more

likely to respond to incidents in licensed premises compared to females (χ²=13.26, df=5,

p=0.021). Further analysis confirmed that Constables are significantly more likely to

respond to incidents inside licensed premises than Sergeants/Senior Sergeants

(χ²=12.63, df=5, p=0 .027); however, this needs to be viewed with some level of caution

given the uneven sample sizes (80% compared with 20%). As senior officers have

more years of service than comparatively junior officers (e.g. Constables and Senior

Constables), they are less likely to respond to incidents either inside or outside licensed

premises (r=-0.15*).

It is noteworthy that participants reported being significantly more likely to

respond to incidents outside licensed premises than inside licensed premises (χ²=366.49,

df=25, p=<..001). Males were also significantly more likely to respond to incidents in

licensed premises compared to females (χ²=15.16, df=5, p=0.01). Constables were

98

significantly more likely to respond to incidents outside licensed premises than

Sergeant/Senior Sergeant (χ²=16.56, df=5, p=0.005); however, previous comments

relating to unequal sample sizes are again relevant (refer to Table 7). This is perhaps

unsurprising given that officers at the Sergeant/Senior Sergeant level generally

undertake management and leadership roles and direct operations as opposed to

engaging in operational pursuits. The data is suggestive that the more years of service

that an officer has, the less likely they are lto respond to such incidents (r=-0.231*).

Table 7: Frequency of attendance inside and outside licensed premises by rank Inside Licensed Premises Outside Licensed Premises

Category

Con/

Snr Con

Sgt/

Snr Sgt

CO Other Con/

Snr Con

Sgt/

Snr Sgt

CO Other

Never 11 8 0 0 10 5 0 0 1-5 29 9 1 0 8 9 0 0 6-10 31 10 2 1 14 5 2 0 11-15 24 5 0 0 19 6 0 0 16-20 25 0 1 0 27 3 1 1 Over 20 72 18 1 0 114 22 2 0 Total 192 50 5 1 192 50 5 1

5.4.1.2 Self-initiation response

The nature of police initiation is also an important consideration. When police

respond to an incident either inside or outside a licensed premises it is presumed that

they respond based either on their own initiative (self-initiated) or alternatively, by other

means (external initiation). Self-initiated responses usually include situations in which

an officer personally witnesses an incident and decides to intervene. External initiation

by officers can include directed by police radio through police communications,

directed by senior police or other police generally, or alternatively called by a member

of the public to respond. Research questions were directed at ascertaining the

proportion of participants who had initiated such activity.

As shown in Table 8, a small proportion (n=19, 7.5 %) of participants indicated

that they were non-operational. The highest response was recorded in the less than 25%

category (n=80, 31.9%), followed by 25% to 49%, of which there were 60 responses

(24.8%), and then 50–74%, of which there were 54 responses (21.3%). Only two (8%)

of the responses indicated that 100% of incidents were initiated by the officer

themselves.

99

The data confirms that that the more years in service an officer, the less likely an

officer is to self-initiate (rbp=-0.147*). Not surprisingly, the vast majority of self-

initiated responses were reported by general duties officers (refer to Table 8).

Table 8: Proportion of incidents initiated by rank Con/Snr Con Sgt/Snr Sgt CO Other

Doesn’t apply (non-operational) 12 6 1 0 None 9 7 1 0 Less than 25% 64 16 0 0 25-49% 51 7 1 1 50-74% 43 8 1 0 75-99% 13 5 0 0 100% 0 1 1 0 Total 192 50 5 1

5.4.1.3 Initiation by ‘other means’ response

In contrast, participants were more likely to report that their responses to licensed

premises were the result of means other than being self-directed. There are a broad

range of ways in which a police response can be initiated and these have been described

previously. As in the previous question, officers were again asked to record whether

this question was not relevant to them given that officers were non-operational.

A small proportion (n=17, 6.7%) of participants indicated that they were non

operational. Of the officers who responded to this question, the highest responses

occurred in the following: 50% to 74% was 77 (30.3%), and the next highest response

occurred in the following range: 75% to 99% was 71 (28.0%). The effect of this is that

between 50% to 99% accounted for 58.3% of the responses to the question. Only five

(2.0%) officers indicated that in 100% of cases they were directed by other means to

attend licensed premises.

Table 9: Proportion of incidents responded to by mode of initiation Self-Initiated Initiated by Other Means

n % n %

Doesn’t apply (non–operational) 19 7.5 17 6.7 None 17 6.7 5 2.0 Less than 25% 81 31.9 25 9.8 25-49% 63 24.8 54 21.3 50-74% 54 21.3 77 30.3 75-99% 18 7.1 71 28.0 100% of the incidents 2 0.8 5 2.0 Total 254 100.0 254 100.0

100

These results confirm that there is a greater proportion of matters both inside and

outside licensed premises that are initiated ‘by other means’ rather than being self-

initiated (χ²= 326.31, df=36, p=0.000). As an officer progresses in terms of years of

service, they are also less likely to respond to situations relating to licensed premises by

other means, that is, they are more likely to initiate a self-determined response utilising

their own discretion (r=-0.210**). Table 10 identifies the breakdown of responses

where the means of initiation (e.g. action taken by the respondent) was other than self-

initiation and based upon the rank of the responding officer.

Table 10: Proportion of incidents responded to by other means by rank Con/Snr Con Sgt/Snr Sgt CO Other

Doesn’t apply (non-operational) 10 7 0 0 None 2 1 2 0 Less than 25% 17 6 1 0 25-49% 38 12 2 0 50-74% 62 12 0 1 75-99% 59 11 0 0 100% 4 1 0 0 Total 192 50 5 1

5.4.1.4 Frequency and exposure to the Liquor Act

It was an important consideration in addressing Research Question 1 that

officers’ experiences of the use of the Liquor Act provisions be explored. Therefore

participants were asked if they had reported any of the listed offences against the Liquor

Act in the previous six months.

For the reporting of offences in ‘supplying liquor to unduly intoxicated minor or

disorderly person’, the following responses were recorded: number of officers

indicating that they had taken such action in the previous six months was 45 (17.7%);

number indicating ‘no’ was 189 (74.4%); and ‘unsure’ was 20 (7.9%) (refer to Figure

6). Supplying liquor offences are generally preferred against a licensed premises

operator or their agent. It is noted that participants were proportionally significantly

more likely to engage in prosecutions of individuals compared to liquor supplier

(χ²=48.02, df = 4, p=<.001).

Participants were also asked whether they had taken action with respect to the

offence of ‘minor consuming liquor on licensed premises’. The number of officers

101

indicating that they had taken such action in the previous six months was 52 (20.5%),

while the number indicating ‘no’ was 182 (71.7%), and ‘unsure’ 20 (7.9%).

As well as minors being on licensed premises and consuming alcohol on licensed

premises, a further and analogous offence pursuant to the Liquor Act is the offence of

‘falsely representing age of 18’. This can be facilitated in a number of ways but is most

commonly associated with a person using another person’s identification, or

alternatively presenting false identification. The number of officers indicating that they

had taken such action in the previous six months was 71 (28.0%), while the number

indicating ‘no’ was 166 (65.4%), and ‘unsure’ 17 (6.7%).

Concerning the offence category of ‘consume, remove, receive liquor outside

trading hours’ offences, the following results were recorded: the number of officers

indicating that they had taken such action in the previous six months was 57 (22.4%),

the number indicating ‘no’ was 175 (68.9%), and ‘unsure’ 22 (8.7%). In terms of

reporting offences for ‘found drunk/disorderly or create a disturbance on licensed

premises’, the following responses were recorded: the number of officers indicating that

they had taken such action in the previous six months was 179 (70.5%), while the

number indicating indicating ‘no’ was 64 (25.2%), and ‘unsure’ 11 (4.3%).

Officers reporting offences for ‘sell liquor without a license or permit’, the

following were reported: the number of officers indicating that they had taken such

action in the previous six months was 4 (1.6%), while the number indicating ‘no’ was

224 (88.2%), and ‘unsure’ 26 (10.2%). Regarding the offence of ‘consuming alcohol

in public place’, the following is relevant: the number of officers indicating that they

had taken such action in the previous six months was 179 (70.5%), while the number

indicating ‘no’ was 66 (26.0%), and ‘unsure’ 9 (3.5%). For the reporting of offences for

‘any other Liquor Act offence’, the following is relevant: the number of officers

indicating that they had taken such action in the previous six months was 154 (60.6%),

while the number indicating ‘no’ was 83 (32.7%), and ‘unsure’ 17 (6.7%).

Clearly officers have indicated that they have been involved in other prosecutions

consistent with the Liquor Act and outside of the more common ones previously

identified.

102

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Sell liquor without license or permit

Supplying liquor to unduly intoxicated

minor/disorderly person

Minor consuming liquor on licensed

premises

Consume, remove, receive liquor

outside trading hours

Falsely representing age of 18

Any other Liquor Act offence

Consume alcohol in public place

Found drunk/disorderly or create

disturbance

Yes

No

Unsure

Figure 6: Self-identified prosecution of Liquor Act offences in BCD

103

5.4.1.5 Involvement in Liquor Operations

The first research question also required an exploration of the extent of officer

engagement of the Liquor Act provisions in order to gain an appreciation of the extent

and nature of the police intervention concerning licensed premises. Survey participants

were asked how often in the past six months they had been involved in Liquor Act

enforcement operations.

The number of officers that indicated ‘yes’ was 111 (43.7%) and ‘no 143 (56.3%)

(see Table 11). Not surprisingly, there were no proportional differences in terms of

gender concerning officers who had been involved in liquor operations, with males =

45.5% and females = 37%. Withregards to role, significant differences were identified

overall, because general duties police were most likely to be engaged in such

operations. Proportionally however, the Tactical Crime Squad (TCS) and Central

District Support Unit (CDSU) are over-represented in enforcement operations (e.g.

77.2% of TCS had been involved in such operations, versus 41.3% of general duties). It

should be noted, however, that the sample sizes for TCS and CDSU are reasonably

small and significantly lower than numbers for general duties; furthermore, the use of

TCS and CDSU in liquor operations is not surprising. Given the expertise of these

officers in dealing with public order offences and having regard for the nature of the

licensed premises and attendant risks, TCS and CDSU officers are the logical choice to

engage in operations with LEAPS officers.

Table 11 Frequency of officers involved in Liquor Act enforcement operations

n %

Yes 111 43.7

No 143 56.3

Total 254 100.0

5.4.1.6 Nature of the intervention

A further exploration of the types of interventions being employed by police was

undertaken in order to address Research Question 1. Survey participants were

canvassed in terms of the nature of the strategies that they enforced (see Table 12). This

question also facilitated participants recording if they were non-operational. The effect

104

of this was to record only operational officers for which such strategies would be

relevant.

A small proportion (6.3%) of participants indicated that they were non-

operational. Of the officers who were operational (n=238, 94.7%) and responded to

this question, the most widely used strategy was to tip out alcohol in public places

(M=3.69). Other survey questions were directed at the preference of officers in

employing various styles and are discussed later in the thesis. The next most frequently

used strategies, in order of response were as follows: take to a place of safety (M=2.57),

take or send home (M=2.50), and release into custody of a family member or friend

(M=2.30). Other responses are recorded in the following table (Table 12).

Table 12: Frequency of use of specified strategies

n Mean S.D.

Tip out alcohol in public places 254 3.69 1.885

Take to a place of safety 254 2.57 1.533

Take or send home 254 2.50 1.457

Release into custody of a family or friend 254 2.30 1.335

Liquor SETON 254 2.29 1.457

Take to hospital 254 1.90 1.133

Take no action 254 1.88 1.357

N.B. 1=never, 2=1–5 occasions, 3=6–10 occasions, 4=11–15 occasions, 5=16–20 occasions and 6=over 20 occasions

5.4.2 Police knowledge

5.4.2.1 Knowledge of effective strategies in licensed premises

A key research objective was to identify the level of officer knowledge with

respect to those strategies which officers believed were effective in reducing alcohol-

related harm in licensed premises. The purpose of this was to explore (in one question)

the baseline level of officer knowledge that existed and then to gauge, through

qualitative means, the extent of officer use of such strategies.

As can be observed in Table 13, the majority of Constables and Senior

Constables scored either a ‘low’ or ‘no knowledge’ (n=177, 70%). Similarly, both

Sergeants and Senior Sergeants recorded ‘low’ or ‘no knowledge’ (n=40, 16%). In

comparison, commissioned officers scored much higher in their knowledge levels than

both the Constable/Senior Constable and Sergeant/Senior Sergeant levels. Of the five

105

commissioned officers, one scored ‘no knowledge’ (20%) and four scored ‘moderate

knowledge’ (80%).

Table 13: Level of officer knowledge of effective strategies by rank Con/Snr Con Sgt/Snr Sgt CO Other

No knowledge 63 13 1 0

Low knowledge 114 27 0 0

Moderate knowledge 12 9 4 1

High knowledge 3 1 0 0

N.B. Six participants did not indicate their rank and therefore are excluded from table.

As identified previously there is a diversity of job roles within BCD. Job role, as

opposed to rank, was examined as an indicator of knowledge. Of the 153 general duties

officers that participated in the survey, the following responses were recorded: 46=‘no

knowledge’, 94=‘low knowledge’, 10=‘moderate knowledge’, and 3=‘high knowledge’.

Other key work units were examined concerning their knowledge of effective strategies

and the relevant results are identified within the following table (refer to Table 14).

Interestingly, Investigative (CIB/CPIU) officers reported either no (n=8) or low levels

of knowledge (n=16) compared with responses for moderate (n=4) to high levels (n=0).

Table 14: Level of officer knowledge of effective strategies by job role Level of knowledge Gen.

Duties

Invest.

(CIB/CPIU)

TCS/

CDSU

Intel. Crime

Prev.

LEAPS Other

Spec.

No knowledge 46 8 4 2 0 1 10

Low knowledge 94 16 12 3 2 1 12

Moderate knowledge 10 4 5 1 2 1 3

High knowledge 3 0 1 0 0 0 0

N.B. Six participants did not indicate their rank and therefore are excluded from table.

5.4.2.2 Knowledge of provisions of the Liquor Act

Further to Research Question 2, which is concerned with officer knowledge of

effective strategies, officers were canvassed as to their knowledge of the provisions of

the Liquor Act. Participants were asked to identify the extent of their knowledge of the

Liquor Act (refer to Table 15).

Only two participants (0.8%) indicated they had no knowledge of the Liquor Act.

The number of participants that had little knowledge was 45 (17.7%), fair knowledge

118 (46.5%), good knowledge 67 (26.4%) and very good knowledge 22 (8.7%). As

106

such, 65% of participants recorded having a low level of knowledge while only 35% of

participants indicated that they had either a good or very good level of knowledge.

It is noted that proportionately, Sergeants and Senior Sergeants were more likely

to report a higher level of knowledge of the Liquor Act than Constables/Senior

Constables (χ²=17.72, df =4, p=0.001).

Table 15: Level of officer knowledge of the Liquor Act

n %

I have no knowledge of it 2 0.8

I have little knowledge of the relevant sections 45 17.7

I have a fair knowledge of the relevant sections 118 46.5

I have good knowledge of the relevant sections 67 26.4

I have a very good knowledge of the relevant sections 22 8.7

5.4.2.3 Perceptions of effectiveness of strategies inside licensed premises

Of relevance to Research Question 2, participants were canvassed as to their

knowledge of effective strategies that can be used inside licensed premises. Officers

were asked to list those strategies which were effective in reducing alcohol-related harm

inside licensed premises. The most frequent responses received were as follows: greater

police presence required (n=81, 31.4%), well trained, efficient and capable security

providers (n=46, 17.8%), ensuring responsible service of alcohol to patrons (n=31,

12.0%), effective closed circuit television (CCTV) (n=26, 10.1%), reduce trading hours

(n=24, 9.3%), and more public transport (n=24, 9.3%). The analysis of the most

frequent results did not find any strong relationships with gender, rank or job role. The

11 most frequent responses are recorded in Table 16.

Table 16: Strategies identified by officers as effective in reducing harm Strategy n %

More uniformed walk throughs of licensed premises 70 27.1

Ensuring responsible service of alcohol 65 25.2

Well trained, efficient and capable security staff 56 21.7

Reducing trading hours of licensed premises 34 13.2

Effective Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) 25 9.7

Reduce patron numbers 19 7.4

Education campaigns for patrons 17 6.6

Effective licensed premises management and accountability 16 6.2

Zero tolerance and strict enforcement of laws 16 6.2

ID Scanners at licensed premises 14 5.4

Plastic cups (instead of glass containers) 14 5.4

107

5.4.2.4 Knowledge of effective strategies outside licensed premises

A further key research objective was to identify the level of officer knowledge

with respect to those strategies which officers believed are effective in reducing alcohol-

related harm outside licensed premises. Using an open-ended questioning technique

participants were asked to list those strategies which they believe are effective in

reducing alcohol-related harm outside licensed premises.

The majority of Constables and Senior Constables scored either a ‘low’ or ‘no

knowledge’ (n=181, 94%). Similarly, both Sergeants and Senior Sergeants recorded

‘low’ or ‘no knowledge’ (n=43, 86%). In comparison, commissioned officers scored

much higher in their knowledge levels than both the Constable/Senior Constable and

Sergeant/Senior Sergeant levels. Of the five commissioned officers, one scored ‘no

knowledge’ (20%); three scored ‘moderate knowledge’ (60%) and one scored ‘high

knowledge’ (20%).

Interestingly, only 21 officers (8.4%) scored ‘moderate knowledge’ and 3 officers

(1.2%) scored ‘high knowledge’. It should be noted that there was a considerably high

number of participants (n=94, 38%) that scored ‘no knowledge’. Some caution should

be exercised when interpreting this data as it is uncertain as to the reasons that officers

did not respond to this question. A participant’s failure to record a response may be

associated with lack of knowledge, or an unwillingness to record a response. In cases

where a participant may be unwilling, for whatever reason, to record a response, it is

accepted that there is no way of ascertaining the proportion of no responses which fall

into the unwilling categorisation. These are unfortunately the issues associated with

missing data. However, given that the data is qualitative in nature, much can still be

learned from the responses provided (see Table 17 for responses).

Table 17 Knowledge of strategies in policing outside licensed premises by rank

Level of knowledge

Con/Snr Con Sgt/Snr Sgt CO Other

No knowledge 77 16 1 0

Low knowledge 104 27 0 1

Moderate knowledge 9 7 3 0

High knowledge 2 0 1 0

N.B. Six participants did not indicate their rank and therefore are excluded from table.

108

Job role, as opposed to rank, was also examined as an indicator of knowledge. Of

the 153 general duties officers that participated in the survey, the following responses

were recorded: ‘no knowledge’ (n=57), ‘low knowledge’ (n=82), ‘moderate knowledge’

(n=12), and ‘high knowledge’ (n=2). A range of other work units were investigated as

to the knowledge of effective strategies and the results are recorded in the following

table (refer to Table 18).

Table 18: Knowledge of strategies of policing outside licensed premises by role

Level of knowledge

Gen.

Duties

Invest.

(CIB/CPIU)

TCS/

CDSU

Intel. Crime

Prev.

LEAPS Other

Spec.

No knowledge 57 14 6 2 1 1 10

Low knowledge 82 17 11 4 3 2 13

Moderate knowledge 12 1 4 0 0 0 2

High knowledge 2 0 1 0 0 0 0

N.B. Six participants did not indicate their rank and therefore are excluded from table.

5.4.2.5 Perception of effectiveness outside licensed premises

Participants were asked to list those strategies which were effective in reducing

alcohol-related harm outside licensed premises. The most frequent response received

was greater police presence required (n=81, 31.4%), followed by well trained, efficient

and capable security providers (n=46, 17.8%), ensuring responsible service of alcohol

to patrons (n=31, 12.0%), effective closed circuit television (CCTV) (n=26, 10.1%),

reduce trading hours (n=24, 9.3%), and more public transport (n=24, 9.3%). The

analysis of the most frequent results did not find any strong relationships with gender,

rank or job role. The ten most frequent responses are identified in Table 19 below.

Table 19: Strategies identified by officers as effective in reducing harm Strategy n %

Greater police presence required 81 31.4

Well trained, efficient and capable security 46 17.8

Ensuring responsible service of alcohol to patrons 31 12.0

Effective Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) 26 10.1

Reduce trading hours (of licensed premises) 24 9.3

More public transport 24 9.3

More taxis and taxi ranks 19 7.4

Zero tolerance and strict enforcement of laws 16 6.2

Improvement in lighting outside licensed premises 13 5.0

Education campaigns for patrons 11 4.3

109

5.4.2.6 Origins of knowledge to police licensed premises

From a research perspective, not only is it important to establish the extent of

officer knowledge but it is also important to understand from where this knowledge is

derived. In terms of the sources of officer knowledge, participants were asked how they

acquired the knowledge to police inside licensed premises. A diversity of responses

were provided, which were subsequently themed into a number of areas, including

training, experience, other police officers, other organisations, and other materials. The

analysis of the most frequent results did not find any strong relationships with gender,

rank or job role. The most frequent responses under each theme are recorded in Table

20 below.

Table 20: Origins of officer knowledge to police inside licensed premises. n

Training 151

Liquor course (also called Act, Incident, Enforcement, Investigation course) 41

Training (QPS, station, scenario-based, courses, lectures) 36

Central District Support Unit training (including LEAPS training) 31

Academy 12

Team training/management days 8

First Year Constable training 8

Field Training Officer instruction 7

Post-operational skills training 5

Experience 140

On-the-job 105

Previous experience in other locations or commands 17

Personal/life experience (e.g. being a patron or nominee) 9

Common sense 7

Other Police Officers 75

Advice from other colleagues 24

Observation of other colleagues 14

Liaising with LEAPS Unit 14

Supervisor 13

Discussion with colleagues/information obtained from colleagues 9

Other Organisations 9

Office of Liquor and Gaming Regulation (OLGR) 4

Relevant Materials 52

Self-initiated learning (any source) 31

Legislation (either Liquor Act or Police Powers and Responsibilities Act) 16

110

As was discussed previously, there are a range of ways that officers attain

knowledge, some of which are formal and others informal. It was previously reported

that officers were asked to identify the origins of their knowledge to police inside

licensed premises. Participants were also asked how they acquired the knowledge to

police inside licensed premises. Responses are provided in Table 21 below. As with

the results in Table 20, a diversity of responses were provided, which were subsequently

themed into a number of areas, including training, experience, other police officers,

other organisations and relevant materials. The most frequent responses under each

theme are recorded in Table 21 below.

Table 21: Origins of officer knowledge to police outside licensed premises. n

Training 150

Training (QPS, station, scenario-based) 37

Liquor course (also called Act, Incident, Enforcement course) 27

Central District Support Unit training 23

QPSA (Queenslandld Police Service Academy) 17

Physical training 12

Post-operational skills training 12

Team training/management days 6

First year Constable training 6

Field Training Officer instruction 6

Experience 131

On-the-job 105

Previous experience in other locations or commands 12

Personal/life experience (e.g. being a patron) 8

Common sense 5

Other Police Officers 68

Advice from other colleagues 19

Observation of other colleagues 17

Discussion with colleagues/information obtained from colleagues 13

Liaising with LEAPS Unit 11

Supervisor 6

Other Organisations 5

Office of Liquor and Gaming Regulation (OLGR) 8

Relevant Materials 52

Self-initiated learning (any source) 37

Legislation (either Liquor Act or Police Powers and Responsibilities Act) 9

111

5.4.3 Police beliefs

5.4.3.1 Proportion of incidence with alcohol involvement

Research Question 3 is concerned with the belief systems that officers hold

relevant to the policing of licensed premises. Participants were asked what proportion

of incidents that police are called to or respond to (in BCD) involved alcohol. In asking

this question, officer’s beliefs as to the associations between common response

situations and alcohol involvement were being canvassed. It is noted that beliefs

generally have an evaluative component implicit in the individual’s rationalisation of a

given situation.

Six participants (2.4%) indicated that less than 25% of incidents involved

alcohol, 54 (21.3%) indicated that the involvement level was 25% to 49%, 118 (46.5%)

indicated 50% to 74%, and 76 (29.9%) indicated 75% to 99%. None of the participants

indicated that 100% of matters involved alcohol (refer to Table 22).

Not surprisingly, given the nature of BCD, police identified a strong association

between the issues that they respond to and alcohol involvement. This is confirmed by

the response that 194 (75.5%) of the sample indicated that alcohol was associated with

greater than 50% of the incidents to which they responded. Analysis of the data

identified that there was no significant difference between rank and the perceptions of

the officers concerning the police response and alcohol link.

Table 22: Proportion of incidents that involve alcohol

n %

Less than 25% 6 2.4

25-49% 54 21.3

50-75% 118 46.5

75-99% 76 29.9

100% 0 0.0

Total 254 100.0

5.4.3.2 Perceptions based on incident type

Participants were specifically asked, “In your experience during the last six

months, what proportion of the following types of incidents do you think involved

alcohol?”

112

Not surprisingly, officers identified that ‘disturbances in licensed premises’ were

the incidents with the highest alcohol involvement (M=8.97). After this response,

means of other responses dropped markedly. These responses were recorded on a 10-

point Likert scale and each of the scales represented a percentage (i.e. 1=10% and

10=100, etc.). A range of other responses are recorded in the following table (refer to

Table 23).

Table 23: Perceptions of alcohol involvement based on incident

n Mean S.D.

Disturbance in a licensed premise 242 8.97 1.815

Street disturbance 242 7.84 1.727

Assault 242 7.44 1.957

Noise 242 6.48 2.325

Domestic 242 5.50 2.425

Disturbance in a private dwelling 242 4.98 2.393

Traffic crash 242 2.30 1.782

5.4.3.3 Perceptions of complexity of response

In order to fully explore the belief systems of officers, participants were asked to

identify those contexts in which alcohol added to both the complexity and difficulty of

the police response. Participants were asked the degree that alcohol contributes to the

complexity and difficulty of policing certain situations. These responses were recorded

on a ten-point Likert scale.

The situation which scored the most significant mean response in terms of

difficulty was a ‘disturbance in a licensed premise’ (M=8.05). Importantly, participants

recorded convincingly that the item ‘disturbance in licensed premises’ was both the

most frequent matter they responded to while at the same time being the most difficult

or complex. The reasons for the view about the difficulty of attending such matters are

discussed later in the analysis. The next highest response was a ‘street disturbance’

(M=7.58) followed by an ‘assault’ (M=7.46). Other responses were reported and are

recorded in the following table (refer to Table 24).

While between-groups analysis could not be undertaken because of the uneven

sample size, at a descriptive level it is noteworthy that both general duties and

Sergeants/Senior Sergeants were in agreement to the same extent with respect to the

contribution of alcohol as a factor in matters to which they responded.

113

Table 24: Perceptions of complexity and difficulty in responding by offence type

n Mean S.D.

Disturbance in a licensed premise 254 8.05 1.715

Street disturbance 254 7.58 1.804

Assault 254 7.46 1.732

Domestic 254 7.02 1.959

Disturbance in a private dwelling 254 6.46 1.873

Noise 254 6.09 2.146

Traffic crash 254 4.45 2.522

5.4.3.4 Perceptions of settings and complexity

Participants were asked how locations increase the difficulty of managing an

alcohol-related incident, which was measured on a 10-point Likert scale. The location

which recorded the highest mean response in terms of difficulty in managing the police

response was ‘inside licensed nightclubs’ (M=7.97). Consistently, incidents within

licensed premises have been correlated strongly with both alcohol involvement,

contributing to the complexity of the response and the difficulty in dealing with matters.

The second highest mean response was ‘inside licensed clubs’ (M=7.55), followed by

‘inside hotels’ (M=7.32) and ‘around licensed premises’ (M=7.01). Other responses are

reported in the following table (refer to Table 25). It is noteworthy that both general

duties and Sergeants/Senior Sergeants had determined that alcohol contributed to the

difficulty of managing events in a range of settings. The analysis of the most frequent

results did not find any strong associations with gender, rank or job role.

Table 25: Perceptions of difficulty in responding to incidents by location

n Mean S.D.

Inside licensed nightclubs 254 7.97 1.875

Inside licensed clubs 254 7.55 2.001

Inside hotels 254 7.32 2.206

Around licensed premises 254 7.01 1.882

Major public entertainment venues 254 6.61 1.990

Private dwellings 254 5.30 2.368

Shopping malls 254 4.69 2.090

Other public places 254 4.46 2.122

Of further relevance to Research Question 3, which examines officer belief

systems, participants were asked how factors increase the difficulty of managing an

114

alcohol-related incident. Participants were asked to record their response using a 10-

point Likert scale (1=not at all difficult; 3=a little difficult; 5=moderately difficult;

7=substantially difficult; 10=very difficult). The factor which recorded the highest

mean response in terms of difficulty in managing the police response was ‘one or more

people involved are being aggressive’ (M=8.17). The next four responses were ‘the

spectators are affected by alcohol’ (M=7.73), ‘one or more people involved are mentally

ill’ (M=7.21), ‘one or more people involved are emotionally volatile’ (M=7.21), and

‘there is a victim who is affected by alcohol’ (M=7.16). Interestingly, the least likely

factors were issues of age and gender, as well as drink-driving-related matters (refer to

Table 26). The analysis of the most frequent results did not find any strong associations

with gender, rank or job role.

Table 26: Perceptions of contextual factors and difficulty of managing incidents

n Mean S.D.

One or more people involved are being aggressive 254 8.17 1.620

The spectators are affected by alcohol 254 7.73 1.781

One or more people involved are mentally ill 254 7.21 2.049

One or more people involved are emotionally volatile 254 7.20 1.773

There is a victim who is also affected by alcohol 254 7.16 1.869

The incident has occurred between the hours of 10pm and 4am 254 6.97 2.317

The people are also suspected of using illicit drugs 254 6.87 2.077

One or more people involved are Pacific Islanders 254 6.81 2.250

The people have cultural disadvantage and/or language barriers 254 6.56 2.157

The people are predominantly male 254 6.48 2.224

One or more people involved are Aborigines or Torres Strait Islanders 254 6.38 2.361

There are spectators 254 6.37 2.127

One or more people involved require medical attention for an injury or physical illness

254 6.23 1.985

The people are overseas tourists/backpackers 254 6.20 2.169

The incident involves an arrest 254 6.16 2.339

Incident occurs in a public place 254 6.04 2.014

The people are predominantly female 254 5.93 2.206

The people involved are juveniles 254 5.74 2.259

The people involved are aged between 18 and 40 254 5.70 2.331

A drink driving related matter 254 4.68 2.050

5.4.3.5 Perceptions of difficulty in managing situations

Additional to the alcohol involvement and location questions, participants were

asked the reasons that alcohol added to the complexity of policing. Responses were

115

recorded under three main themes: venue/environmental issues (n=57), patron issues

(n=209), and general policing issues (n=11) (refer to Table 27).

Table 27 Degree of difficulty and reasons in managing issues n

Venue/Environment Issues 57

Crowding 23

Disturbances on street/outside venue 15

Nightclub disturbances/assaults/incidents 12

Transportation home (e.g. Taxi queues, train stations) 3

Lack of public toilets for large crowds 1

Security personnel inflaming situations by being violent 1

Low levels of staff in licensed premises 1

Waiting for arrested person to be taken from venue 1

Patron/General Public Issues 209

ATSI/Pacific Islander/Ethnic patrons becoming violent and uncooperative 35

Aggressive behaviour generally 26

Bystanders getting involved or obstructing police 22

Difficulty communicating or reasoning with drunk patrons 21

Groups of intoxicated patrons/victims/witnesses/friends 12

Aggressive women 8

Lack of credible witnesses (due to intoxication) 8

Dealing with patrons that have consumed drugs + alcohol 6

Controlling crowds – managing risk for patrons/bystanders 6

Assaults involving multiple offenders 5

Evicted patrons arguing to return to venue 4

Young/Juvenile people who are intoxicated 4

Non-English speaking patrons 3

Volatility of intoxicated people 3

Lack of accurate recall of complaint 3

Tourists not respecting laws (e.g. Irish backpackers) 2

Patrons with mental health issues (when drunk) 2

Victims of assault changing their minds in statements when they sober up 2

Emotional patrons (due to major loss/grief) 1

Involvement of weapons by patron 1

Policing Issues 11

Low police staffing levels 5

Safety of police officers 4

Poor communication skills (of officers) 1

Disease risk from offenders when they spit/bleed 1

5.4.3.6 Perceptions of responsibility for the Liquor Act

In order to establish the attitude of police to the notion of responsibility for

enforcing the Act, participants were asked ‘whether police should have sole, shared or

no responsibility for enforcing the Liquor Act’. Responses to this question were

provided in terms of three options: (1) sole responsibility for enforcing the Liquor Act,

116

(2) shared responsibility for enforcing the Liquor Act, or (3) no responsibility for

enforcing the Liquor Act (see Figure 7).

Participants recorded the following responses: the number indicating that the

Service should have sole responsibility was 22 (8.7%), shared responsibility 229

(90.2%), and no responsibility 3 (1.2%). The analysis of the most frequent results did

not find any strong associations with gender, rank or job role.

Figure 7: Perception by police of responsibility for the Liquor Act

5.4.3.7 Attitudes of effectiveness of external partners in harm reduction

Participants were also asked the following question: “How effective do you

believe the following partners/stakeholders are in terms of addressing alcohol-related

harm in and around licensed premises?” Responses to this question were provided and

included the main stakeholders that police partner with in addressing issues inside and

outside licensed premises.

The responses received (n=254) indicated that the officers surveyed believed that

Office of Liquor and Gaming Regulation (OLGR) as the entity which was most

effective in dealing with alcohol-related issues concerning licensed premises (M=5.48).

Responses were recorded on a 10-point Likert scale. A range of other responses were

recorded and are detailed in the following table (refer to Table 28). The results did not

identify any differences in responses based on gender or rank. Only two negative

relationships were found: those between years of service and ratings of OLGR (r=-0.19,

p=<.001), and Queensland Ambulance Service (r =-0.21**).

117

Table 28: Police perceptions of effectiveness of partners/stakeholders

n Mean S.D.

Office of Liquor and Gaming Regulation 254 5.48 2.224

Security Providers 254 5.24 2.202

Queensland Ambulance Service 254 5.15 2.656

Licensees 254 4.69 2.427

Queensland Fire and Rescue Service 254 4.16 2.435

Brisbane City Council 254 4.01 2.103

Queensland Health 254 3.58 2.108

5.4.3.8 Belief of the effectiveness of the 3 a.m. lockout provisions

Participants were asked what effect the 3 a.m. lockout provisions have in terms of

public safety through contributing to reductions in alcohol-related harm, using a 5-point

scale.

The majority of participants (65.4%) indicated that there had been some positive

to major positive impact as a result of these provisions. Approximately one-fifth of

participants (n=52, 20.5%) indicated that there had been no impact while others (n=36,

14.2%) indicated that there had been some negative to major negative impact. An

analysis of the data reveals that there were no differences in the opinions of officers,

based on rank, regarding this initiative (refer to Table 29).

Table 29: Officer perception of effectiveness of 3 a.m. lockout provisions

n %

Major negative impact 11 4.3

Some negative impact 25 9.8

No impact 52 20.5

Some positive impact 134 52.8

Major positive impact 32 12.6

Total 254 100.0

118

5.4.4 Police strategy

5.4.4.1 Perceptions by police of effectiveness of certain strategies

Research Question 4 builds on earlier questions which serve to ‘test’ officer

knowledge of those strategies which are effective. This question functions to examine

officer beliefs by asking for a subjective assessment of the utility of a particular

strategy. Participants were asked how effective they believed each of the strategies was

in reducing alcohol-related incidents both inside and outside licensed premises (refer to

Table 30). Participant’s responses were recorded using a 10-point Likert scale.

The responses identified that police believe ‘responsible service of alcohol’

(M=8.14) to be the most effective strategy in reducing drug and alcohol-related

incidents concerning licensed premises. The next three most perceived effective

strategies were ‘strict enforcement of liquor laws – arresting or prosecuting offenders’

(M=8.02), ‘training bar staff and security to manage conflicts effectively’ (M=7.86),

and ‘intensive uniform police presence and operations outside and around licensed

premises’ (M=7.72). Interestingly, the least supported strategy in terms of officer

perceived effectiveness was ‘permit more self-regulation by owner operators and

managers’ (M=4.25). A range of other responses are provided in Table 30.

Further exploration of the data through between group analyses (e.g. t-tests &

chi-square) revealed no differences between the perceived effectiveness of strategies

and (a) rank, (b) years of service, or (c) exposure to policing licensed premises.

Bonferroni type adjustments were made to accommodate for Type 1 errors for theses

analyses.

119

Table 30: Perceptions of effectiveness of strategies to reduce harm

n Mean S.D.

Responsible service of alcohol 254 8.14 2.082

Strict enforcement of liquor laws – arresting or prosecuting offenders 254 8.02 1.840

Training bar staff and security to manage conflicts effectively 254 7.86 2.082

Intensive uniform police presence and operations outside and around licensed premises

254 7.72 1.973

Increased security at taxi ranks 254 7.63 1.922

Close liaison between police, owners/operators and managers to encourage compliance with liquor laws

254 7.41 2.100

More proactive audits by liquor licensing officers 254 7.30 2.151

Intensive uniform presence and operations inside licensed premises 254 7.13 2.411

Plain clothes police monitoring of liquor license contraventions 254 6.69 2.426

RBT operations outside/near premises 254 6.61 2.521

Improved food, entertainment and surroundings within licensed premises 254 5.59 2.439

Permit more self-regulation by owner operators and managers 254 4.25 2.703

5.4.5 Skill levels and training

5.4.5.1 Skills required in policing licensed premises

Research Question 5 seeks to identify the skill levels of individual officers

necessary for them to deal with incidents involving alcohol both inside and outside

licensed premises. In order to address this question, officers were asked what skills

they believe are most useful in addressing incidents.

The most important skill was ‘maintaining control of the situation’ (M=8.98)

followed by ‘decisiveness in taking action’ (M=8.69), ‘identifying and isolating the ring

leader’ (M=8.55), and ‘removing the person for their own safety’ (M=8.28). The least

important skills were recorded as being ‘giving orders’ (M=6.67) and ‘displaying

empathy’ (M=5.73). A range of other responses are provided in Table 31 below.

Further exploration of the data through t-tests and chi-square analyses revealed

no differences between the perceived effectiveness of skills in dealing with incidents

involving alcohol and (a) rank, (b) years of service, or (c) exposure to policing licensed

services.

120

Table 31: Officer perception of importance of skills

n Mean S.D.

Maintaining control of the situation 254 8.98 1.188

Decisiveness in taking action 254 8.69 1.325

Identifying and isolating the ring leader 254 8.55 1.437

Removing the person for their own safety 254 8.28 1.525

Talking to calm the person down 254 7.94 1.828

Demonstrating knowledge of the law 254 7.59 1.953

Self restraint 254 7.40 1.987

To move the person on 254 7.34 1.790

Considering alternative actions 254 7.21 1.895

Explaining rather than giving orders 254 6.98 2.223

Listening 254 6.98 2.285

Giving orders 254 6.67 1.896

Displaying empathy 254 5.73 2.328

5.4.5.2 Self-assessment skill levels to police licensed premises

An important consideration in addressing Research Question 5 (officer skill

levels) is the self-assessed skill levels of the individual officers. Participants were asked

what level of skill they thought they had to deal with an incident inside a licensed

premises. The participants were provided with a 4-point scale (1=very poor; 2=poor

3=good; and 4=very good). The vast majority of police officers viewed their skill levels

as ‘good/very good’ (88.6%), while a small number of officers indicated that their skill

level was ‘poor/very poor’ (11.4%). It is noted that proportionately, Sergeants and

Senior Sergeants were more likely to report a higher level of perceived skill managing

incidents than Constables and Senior Constables (χ²=9.80, df=3, p=0.02).

Participants were also asked about skill levels in taking action outside licensed

premises. Those with self-identified ‘very poor’ skills were one (1.4%), ‘poor’ skills

were 10 (3.9%), ‘good’ skills were 190 (74.8%), and ‘very good’ skills were 53 (20.9%)

(refer to Table 32). No differences were identified between Sergeants/Senior Sergeants

and Constables/Senior Constables in regards to their perceived skills to manage an

incident outside licensed premises.

Comparative analysis between the self-identified skill levels of officers to police

both in and outside licensed premises was both extremely high, albeit at a different level

(χ²=283.16, df=9, p=<.001). In the case of those that reported ‘good’ or ‘very good’ skill

levels in licensed premises, 225 responses (88.6%) were recorded as opposed to outside

121

licensed premises which recorded 243 (95.7%). Participant responses of ‘poor’ or ‘very

poor’ level of skill in relation to licensed premises were 29 (11.4%) and those outside

licensed premises were 11 (4.3%). Overall there was an extremely high level of skill in

responding to such premises despite the previously identified deficiencies concerning

knowledge of the Liquor Act.

Table 32: Perception of officer skills to police licensed premises Inside Licensed Premises Outside Licensed Premises

n % n %

Very poor 4 1.6 1 0.4 Poor 25 9.8 10 3.9 Good 188 74.0 190 74.8 Very good 37 14.6 53 20.9 Total 254 100 254 100.0

5.4.5.4 Perceived levels of training to police licensed premises

A key assumption held in this program of research, supported by the literature, is

that training is strongly correlated with skill levels. In order to address Research

Question 5, it was necessary to explore issues around the exposure, nature and extent of

officer training. Participants were asked “How would you describe the level of training

you have received in responding to alcohol-related incidents inside licensed premises?”

(refer to Table 33). Those officers who identified that they had not received any

training were 47 (18.5%). The participants recorded the following responses: those

with self-identified ‘very poor’ skills were 18 (7.1%), ‘poor’ skills were 63 (24.8%),

‘good’ skills were 106 (41.7%), and ‘very good’ skills were 20 (7.9%).

The results identified that there was no relationship between level of training and

years in service, meaning that having more or less service was not associated with the

quantum of training. There were, however, differences identified by rank, as there was

an even distribution for both Constables/Senior Constables when compared with

Sergeants/Senior Sergeants, as some participants in both groups reported that their

training was poor. It is of note that 53% of the Constables/Senior Constables

considered they had either no training, very poor, or poor training.

Officers were also asked about their level of training to respond to matters

outside licensed premises. The rationale for such a question was to compare the level

and extent of police training and to determine whether there existed a bias in the

direction of such training. Nineteen officers (7.5%) identified that they had not received

122

any training. The following responses were recorded: ‘very poor’ skill (n=18, 7.1%),

‘poor’ (n=66, 26.0%), ‘good’ (n=132, 52.0%), and ‘very good’ (n=19, 7.5%) (refer to

Table 33).

Table 33: Perception of level of training to respond to incidents Inside Licensed Premises Outside Licensed Premises

n % n %

No training 47 18.5 19 7.5 Very poor training 18 7.1 18 7.1 Poor training 63 24.8 66 26.0 Good training 106 41.7 132 52.0 Very good training 20 7.9 19 7.5 Total 254 100 254 100

Responses indicated that there were differences in the level of training that police

officers have received with respect to their ability to respond to incidents in licensed

premises and outside licensed premises. Nearly 50% (n=126) of police reported ‘good’

and ‘very good’ levels of training concerning policing in licensed premises compared

with 151 (59.5%) responses outside such premises. Figure 8 illustrates the differences

in responses to training levels. Clearly these results support a finding that training has

been given greater prominence in terms of policing outside licensed premises than

inside such premises (χ²=393.74, df=16, p=<.001).

Examination of the data indicated that there was no relationship between the level

of training and years in service. Equally, there was no difference by rank, given that

there was an even distribution for both Constables/Senior Constables when compared

with Sergeants/Senior Sergeants due to some participants in both groups reporting that

their training was poor. It is noted that a much greater proportion considered their

training ‘good’ or ‘very good’ (e.g. inside premises=49.6% and outside

premises=59.5%).

123

Figure 8: Perception of level of training on response to licensed premises

5.4.5.5 Comparative levels of training to police licensed premises

When the training data is compared between inside and outside licensed premises

there are some notable differences. The results are highly suggestive that other officers

are very influential in offering training to responding officers and thereby enhancing

their skill and capability when it comes to dealing with incidents inside licensed

premises. In the case of training police for policing outside premises, participants

reported that formal training initiatives such as ‘station training’ and ‘liquor courses’

were important sources of training from which officers derived knowledge and skill to

respond to alcohol-related incidents (refer to Figure 9).

124

Figure 9: Officer-identified sources of training to police licensed premises

5.4.6 Barriers and impediments

5.4.6.1 Perceptions – Sufficiency of police powers

Research Question 6 aimed to establish the barriers which prevent or reduce the

capability of police officers to effectively manage alcohol incidents concerning licensed

premises (refer to Section 7.6).

The majority of responses fell within the ‘fairly sufficient’ to ‘very sufficient’

range (74.4%). Those participants who identified that police powers were ‘somewhat

sufficient’ to ‘insufficient’ were in the minority (25.6%). It was noted that there were

no differences between genders or among those with different years of service and

experience.

Officer perception of the extent of their powers was also questioned, this time

with respect to powers relating to managing incidents outside licensed premises (refer to

Table 34).

The majority of responses fell within the ‘fairly sufficient’ to ‘very sufficient’

range (82.3%). Those participants who identified that police powers were ‘somewhat

sufficient’ to ‘insufficient’ were again in the minority (17.7%).

125

Participants identified that there is a level of sufficiency with the police powers

they have to deal with alcohol-related issues within licensed premises. When compared

with powers to police outside licensed premises, participants clearly reported that their

powers were superior in dealing with incidents outside licensed premises than inside

such premises (χ²=459.85, df=16, p=<.001).

Table 34: Perception of police powers to manage incidents Inside Licensed Premises Outside Licensed Premises

n % n %

Insufficient 11 4.3 10 3.9 Somewhat sufficient 54 21.3 35 13.8 Fairly sufficient 75 29.5 80 31.5 Sufficient 96 37.8 108 42.5 Very sufficient 18 7.1 21 8.3 Total 254 100.0 254 100.0

5.4.6.2 Comparative assessment of police powers

Given that police powers provide significant authority for police to engage in

certain (lawful) actions, the absence of sufficient powers could significantly curtain or

impede police activity. This is therefore important in further considering Research

Question 6 dealing with barriers to police performance in this area (refer to Figure 10).

The results indicate that officers have greater reported levels of satisfaction with their

police powers relevant to policing outside licensed premises than inside such premises

(7.9% greater response). Interestingly, no differences were identified in the responses

based on gender or years of service and experience.

126

Figure 10: Perception of powers to manage incidents concerning licensed premises

5.4.6.3 Factors which constrain police

In addressing Research Question 6 it is important to consider the factors which

may restrict or constrain police from otherwise engaging in activity inside and outside

licensed premises. These results were recorded on a 5-point Likert scale.

Participants were given a range of contextual factors from which it was identified

that ‘physical resources’ were the most constraining factor for police (M=3.22). The

next three most constraining factors were identified to be ‘time’ (M=3.17), ‘safety for

police in licensed premises’ (M=3.08), and ‘police support’ (M=2.90). The least likely

factors to constrain or restrict police from policing licensed premises were knowledge of

effective policing strategies (M=2.17) and the individual’s knowledge of policy

(M=2.14). A range of other responses are documented in Table 35.

The results did not find any differences based on gender or rank. A negative

relationship between years of service and knowledge of policy (r=-0.16*) was found,

which indicates that as years of service increase the barriers which serve to constrain

officers reduces. Similarly, as years of experience and on-the-job experience (r=-0.16*)

increase then so does officers’ perceptions of safety in the licensed premises setting (r=-

0.19**). This suggests that junior/inexperienced officers have higher

perceptions/beliefs that licensed premises are unsafe environments than do more

127

experienced officers (higher years of service and greater actual experience).

Correspondingly, more experienced officers, in terms of years of service and on-job

exposure to operational policing hold a contrary view about the safety of licensed

premises, believing that such premises are safer than do less experienced officers.

Table 35: Extent of constraint of factors in policing licensed premises

n Mean S.D.

Physical resources 254 3.22 1.200

Time 254 3.17 1.108

Safety for police in licensed premises 254 3.08 1.153

Police support 254 2.90 1.265

Organisational support for policing licensed premises 254 2.76 1.108

Level of training 254 2.67 1.074

Support by managers/supervisors 254 2.47 1.080

Existence of strong legislation 254 2.42 0.990

Existence of strong Service policy 254 2.41 0.936

Knowledge of legislation 254 2.19 0.909

On the job experience 254 2.19 1.007

Knowledge of effective policing strategies 254 2.17 0.894

Knowledge of policy 254 2.14 0.882

Participants could record any other barriers not previously identified in an open

text field. Those barriers identified are recorded in the list in Table 36. A broad range

of responses were provided to this question. These responses have been themed under

(1) venue/environment (n=331), patron/general public issues (n=127), and policing

issues (n=118).

128

Table 36: Perceived barriers/obstacles to policing licensed premises n

Venue/Environment Issues 331 Crowding 92 Security staff being over-zealous/uncooperative 56 Too noisy (e.g. can’t hear police radio) 45 Poor lighting in venues 19 ‘Responsible service of alcohol’ not being adhered to 18 Confined spaces/obstacles/access 17 Inexperienced/poorly trained security providers 14 Poor recording of CCTV footage 14 Uncooperative licensees/nominees 11 Large volume of premises in small vicinity (density) 8 Pedestrian safety/traffic 8 Poor recording of witness/offender details by security providers 4 Trading hours too long 4 Insufficient security 4 Crowding outside venue 3 Security providers/venue staff not willing to attend court 3 No networked ID scanners 3 Glass bottles/glasses 3 Difficulties with crime scene preservation/gathering evidence 2 Ability to talk with management 1 Low numbers of venue staff 1 Volatility of environment 1 Patron/General Public Issues 127

Levels of intoxication 75 Bystanders being obstructive/interfering with investigation 18 Drugs 9 Lack of respect for police 8 Aggressive behaviour 8 Patrons being out-of-character due to intoxication 3 Too many witnesses/credibility of witnesses (due to intoxication) 1 Problems identifying offenders 1 Assaults 1 Patrons not knowing the law 1 Group mentality 1 Chaplains 1 Policing Issues 118

Lack of staff 42

Police safety 14

Lack of solid support from government agencies 12

Vague legislation and police powers 10

Lack of resources 9

Job priority (other jobs and areas to patrol) 7

Courts too lenient on offenders 7

Inexperienced police/poor investigative skills 7

Lack of adequate training for police 5

Being reactive rather than proactive 1

Data management 1

Paperwork 1

Time it takes to access police vehicles when have offenders 1

Being in uniform 1

129

5.4.6.4 Identification of factors impeding police effort

Consistent with the questions asking officers to self-identify the barriers to police

in policing licensed premises, officers were also asked to identify what would have to

be done to encourage them to engage more both inside and outside such premises.

The responses received identified that the most significant issue that would lead

to more policing of licensed premises was ‘more support from government’ (M=4.20).

The next three most significant issues identified were ‘more commitment from other

stakeholders’ (M=3.93), ‘safer environments within licensed premises’ (M=3.91), and

‘more time’ (M=3.78). Lastly, police identified that ‘more support from supervisors

and senior managers’ (M = 3.44) and ‘better supervision’ (M=3.06). A range of other

responses are recorded in Table 37. Interestingly, although there were no significant

differences in the responses based on rank, Sergeants (M=4.02) were statistically more

likely [t(240)=-2.26, p=0.025] to state ‘wanting more time’ than were Constables and

Senior Constables (M=3.7). The results did not identify any differences between

genders.

Table 37: Factors that would need to occur to encourage officer attention

n Mean S.D.

More support from government 254 4.20 0.862

More commitment from other stakeholders 254 3.93 0.864

Safer environment within licensed premises 254 3.91 0.893

More time 254 3.78 0.892

Better and more back up 254 3.71 0.990

Better training 254 3.70 0.857

Stronger laws enhanced 254 3.55 0.855

Better Service policy 254 3.50 0.823

Stronger mandate from the Executive of the Service 254 3.48 0.847

More support from supervisors/Senior managers 254 3.44 0.934

Better supervision 254 3.06 0.867

5.4.6.5 Predictors of entering licensed premises

The final objective of the study was to identify what factors were predictive of

frequency in entering licensed premises. Descriptive statistics revealed breaches of

normality, linearity and homoscedasticity. Therefore, to accommodate these

discrepancies, logistic regression was conducted to investigate the predictive role of the

130

above mentioned variables (e.g. job title, reason for initiation, skills, strategies and

training) to frequency of entering licensed premises in the last six months. The outcome

variable was originally measured on an ordinal scale; however, the item was collapsed

into two categories (i.e. more and less than 20 times) after examination of the

frequencies revealed a clear break in the normal distribution at this point (e.g. 16 to 20=

10.2% and over 20=37%). Additionally, only Constables/Senior Constables and

Sergeants/Senior Sergeants were included in this analysis as they were most likely to be

performing such policing duties. Table 38 displays the coefficients, standard errors,

Wald statistics, odds ratios (OR), and 95% confidence intervals for the OR.

Overall, the model was a significant predictor of the outcome variable (χ2(1, 6)=

78.63, p<0.001), and 75.6% of the sample was correctly classified. A closer

examination revealed that four variables were predictive of the dependent variable.

First, and not surprisingly, an increased frequency of both self-initiating (p<0.001) and

being directed by others to enter licensed premises (p<.001) was predictive of such

policing activities. Second, reporting higher levels of perceived skills to effectively

manage an incident inside a licensed premises was also predictive of engaging in a

higher frequency of such behaviour (p<0.05). Third, participants’ perceived level of

training to respond to such incidents was also predictive (p<0.001), although it is noted

that this variable was a combined item and included perceived level of training to

respond to incidents both inside and outside licensed premises. In contrast, perceptions

regarding knowledge of effective strategies to police inside licensed premises was not

predictive of the outcome variable. Finally, inclusion of gender and age did not increase

the predictive value of the model.

To determine the sensitivity of the results, several additional regression models

were estimated. A test of the full model with all independent variables entered

collectively confirmed the same significant predictors. Forward and backward stepwise

regression also identified the same predictors. Interestingly, a corresponding regression

analysis undertaken to identify the predictors of policing at a similar frequency of

incidents outside licensed premises revealed similar results, although participants’

perceived level of training to respond to such incidents was not identified as a

significant predictor in this model.

131

Table 38: Logistic regression for policing incidents inside licensed premises 95% Confidence

interval for OR

Variables B S.E. Wald OR Lower Upper

Job title 0.07 0.43 0.03 1.08 0.46 2.50

Self initiated 0.83 0.16 26.54** 2.29 1.67 3.15

Initiated by other means 0.60 0.18 11.93** 1.83 1.3 2.59

Effective skills 0.76 0.34 4.93* 2.14 1.09 4.19

Effective training 0.41 0.13 9.65** 1.5 1.16 1.94

Knowledge of effective strategies 0.08 0.19 0.18 1.08 0.75 1.57

Model chi-square 78.63** (df=6)

Note: *p <0 .05, **p <0 .001; OR=Odds Ratio.

5.5 Discussion

Research Question 1 sought to identify the nature and extent of the police

intervention within BCD concerning the policing of alcohol-related matters. There has

been some Australian-based empirical research conducted relating to the extent of

police intervention into licensed premises (Doherty & Roche, 2003; Hauritz et al., 1998;

Palk, 2008; K. L. Smith et al., 2001). The research to date has principally focused on

assessing police activity through activity logs. This current research sought officers’

opinions, via research questionnaires, as to the frequency of their engagement in a range

of activities relating to the policing of licensed premises within the previous six-month

period. The results of this survey revealed a high proportion of officers had attended

incidents both inside and outside licensed premises within the past six-month period. It

was noteworthy that participants reported attending significantly more events outside

licensed premises than inside. A greater proportion of male officers than females

reported attendance to incidents inside licensed premises and lower ranks (e.g.

Constables and Senior Constables) reported higher attendance than more senior ranks

(e.g. Sergeants and Senior Sergeants). An explanation for this could be that many of the

licensed premises are highly regulated inside such premises and therefore there is a

strong focus on private security as a strategy to deter and respond to violence and

antisocial behaviour. This is contrasted to outside such premises where ‘policing’

responses are the domain of the police and to a significant lesser extent private security.

It is presumed that the absence of security officers or police in such environments could

encourage offending behaviours. This observation is supported by Routine Activity

132

Theory, which proposes that, amongst other factors, crime occurs when there is an

absence of capable guardians who could intervene.

This research also explored the nature of the police response, in terms of whether

police responded through their own initiation or through initiation by other means. The

reason for initiation is particularly important to investigate, given that this has not been

the subject of prior research and that an understanding of the motivation of officers is

important if they are to reach their potential in addressing problems concerning licensed

premises proactively or in a preventative sense. Although participants reported

reasonably high levels of initiation inside licensed premises, there was a higher

likelihood that initiation would be facilitated through other means. It is presumed that

such other means could be through calls from members of the public, police radio

dispatch or being directed by more senior police to respond. The results however

indicated that self-initiation to incidents outside licensed premises were higher than

those inside such premises. Arguably this can be explained by a range of factors

including that there is more police activity occurring outside rather than inside licensed

premises and there are fewer private security available. For police to self-initiate inside

licensed premises it is suggested that there would need to be correspondingly high

levels of police activity inside such premises and this may not necessarily be the case, at

least to the same extent as outside such premises.

A significant feature of the questionnaire was the exploration of the frequency

and exposure that officers had with offences pertaining to the Liquor Act 1992. One of

the assumptions made prior to this research, which is supported by the literature

(Appleby, 2000; Doherty & Roche, 2003; Findlay et al., 2002; Homel & Tomsen, 1991;

Wagenaar & Wolfson, 1995; Wilner & Hart, 2001), is that when dealing with offences

against the Liquor Act, police officers have a predisposition to taking action against

members of the public who are responsible for low-level offences as opposed to those

responsible for the management of such premises. The data in the survey revealed that

licensed premises operators and their agents, such as security personnel and bar staff,

were believed to be prosecuted to a lesser degree because of a range of factors such as

unfamiliarity with the provisions of the Liquor Act and difficulty in prosecuting

licensed premises operators. This research finding supports Doherty and Roche’s

(2003) proposition, in that participants were proportionally significantly more likely to

give effect to prosecutions of individuals compared to liquor suppliers. Perhaps K. L.

Smith et al.’s (2001) observations may explain reasons for these low-level prosecutions.

133

These include perception by police of a lack of skill, a low prioritisation for alcohol

policing, limited time availability and inadequate penalties. This is an area that could

be the subject of further research.

Research Question 2 sought to identify the level of police officer knowledge of

strategies to address alcohol-related harm concerning licensed premises. This is

regarded as a primary focus of this program of research and on that basis officers were

asked specifically to identify those strategies which were effective in policing both

inside and outside licensed premises. Surprisingly, officers recorded extremely low or

no levels of knowledge in both contexts (inside and outside licensed premises)

regarding effective policing strategies. The results indicate that knowledge of effective

strategies is associated with rank and experience (e.g. the higher rank the greater the

knowledge) and that some specialist units (e.g. LEAPS), naturally given the nature of

their liquor-based work, had higher levels of knowledge. Given the potentiality for

knowledge of the Act to be correlated with activity, this is an area of great opportunity

for the Police Service. The research also examined the sources of officer knowledge.

This is an important factor and one that has not previously been examined. Police

agencies have limited scope to undertake training additional to that which is already

being done. The training agenda is reportedly at high capacity (K. L. Smith et al., 2001)

and the resourcing implications associated with training large decentralised police

agencies are perennial problems (Doherty & Roche, 2003; K. L. Smith et al., 2001).

Research Question 3 aimed to identify the beliefs that police hold relevant to the

policing of licensed premises within BCD. Perhaps unsurprisingly, given the nature of

the research site investigated, participants reported a significant correlation between the

incidents they respond to and alcohol-related involvement. This is confirmed by the

response that 75.5% of the sample indicated that alcohol was associated with greater

than 50% of the incidents that they responded to. Not only was there a high proportion

of alcohol involved in policing responses, but participants also identified that those

premises which were strongly correlated with alcohol provisions (e.g. nightclubs, clubs,

hotels) were perceived to be more complex and difficult to deal with. To take this point

in terms of difficulty and complexity one step further, participants were given a list of

policing contexts regularly responded to by police. A disturbance in a licensed

premises was perceived by participants as significantly more likely to be associated

with alcohol than any other incident. This is a key finding and one which can explain a

key barrier to the policing of such premises.

134

In attempting to understand motivations to police licensed premises, officer

perceptions of responsibility for enforcing the Liquor Act were explored. The vast

majority (90%) of officers identified that enforcing the Liquor Act should be a shared

responsibility, meaning that police held the view that they were but one agency

responsible for facilitating the objects of the Liquor Act.

A further area linked to motivation related to officer perceptions of the

effectiveness of the 3 a.m. lockout provisions, and the attitude of police to this policy

approach was explored. The rationale for this was to determine the acceptance by

police as to the effectiveness of this as a public policy approach to harm reduction. The

results indicate that the majority of participants (65.4%) believe that there was either

some or major positive impact through the introduction of the 3 a.m. lockout provisions.

Research Question 4 explored officer beliefs as to the most effective strategies to

address incidents both inside and outside licensed premises. The participants identified

that strategies such as responsible service of alcohol (RSA) and strict enforcement of

the liquor laws were the strategies most highly supported by police. A range of other

strategies were rated by participants to varying degrees. The least supported strategy

was ‘permit more self regulation by those that facilitate licensed premises’. The results

could indicate operational officers’ scepticism of increased self-regulation within

industry.

Research Question 5 identified the skills that police believe are necessary in

dealing with incidents concerning licensed premises. Naturally, in any work

environment there is a diversity of knowledge, attitudes and skills of individuals

comprising that work unit. The research identifies a range of skills, to varying degrees,

that police identify as important when dealing with alcohol-related incidents. Police

clearly favour actions regarded as being decisive (e.g. maintaining control of the

situation and decisiveness in taking action) as priorities. Still other skills were

identified to a lesser degree as important (e.g. explaining rather than giving orders,

listening, giving orders, displaying empathy). When considered in the context of

previously discussed research relating to the types of action taken, it supports the

finding that police prefer to take decisive action and shun passive or ‘no action’ types of

approaches.

An objective of this research was to determine whether knowledge of the Liquor

Act impacts upon the capability and willingness of officers to police licensed premises.

Arguably, personnel within BCD, having regard for the unique environment and the

135

quantum of licensed premises, have more exposure to Liquor Act offences than do other

police; therefore their expertise in such matters may be elevated. The survey sought to

examine the knowledge of officers by encouraging them to self disclose the extent of

their knowledge. As identified in the results, only 35% of participants reported having

good or very good knowledge of the Liquor Act, which is surprising given the extent of

alcohol-related issues within the survey area. It is also of note that knowledge is

positively correlated with rank. The research also focused on the origins of an officer’s

knowledge. Formal training was identified as a primary source of knowledge to

officers; however experiential opportunities, such as informal training from colleagues,

other work opportunities, and particularly, on-the-job experience rated as significant

sources of knowledge. There were some minor differences between sources of

knowledge to police inside compared with outside premises and this difference was

most notable around learning from other police officers. Officers reported that other

officers were influential in their learning to a higher degree with respect to policing

inside licensed premises over policing outside. This therefore poses significant

opportunities for police, given that most police agencies have scant room for additional

training material in their curricula (King et al., 1997).

There are a number of factors which are likely to contribute to an officer’s

willingness and ability to respond to alcohol-related incidents. Factors such as

knowledge of the Liquor Act and the skill level of the individual officer are considered

relevant. Comparative analysis of the self-identified skill levels of officers to police

both in and outside licensed premises were both extremely high, albeit at a different

level. Overall there was an extremely high identified level of skill in responding to such

premises, despite the previously identified deficiencies concerning knowledge of the

Liquor Act.

The level of training is a critical consideration in explaining the capability and

motivation of officers to police licensed premises. Questions were focused on

identifying the extent of this training in an attempt to determine the limitations in police

training as well as the opportunities for improvement in the future. This is an

acknowledgement that the greatest opportunity to influence police attention on licensed

premises is to increase knowledge and skill as a precursor to increasing their

motivation. The results identified that a high proportion of officers assessed themselves

as having good to very good levels of training to police inside and outside licensed

premises. However, these results support a finding that training has been given greater

136

prominence in terms of policing outside licensed premises than inside such premises.

There is still, however, a reasonably significant proportion of participants who

perceived their skill levels as either poor, very poor, or non-existent and this poses

significant opportunities for the Police Service.

Police officers obtain their authority to exercise various strategies through

legislation and Service policy. Such authorities are otherwise referred to as ‘police

powers’. Given the importance of legitimate authority sources such as legislation and

policy to guide police in their endeavours, police were canvassed about their views of

the sufficiency of such ‘powers’. Participants identified that there was a high level of

satisfaction with the police powers they have to deal with alcohol-related issues within

licensed premises. However, when compared with powers to police outside licensed

premises, participants have clearly reported that their powers are superior in dealing

with incidents outside licensed premises than inside such premises. This has

implications not only for an education and training perspective, but also for an

operational–policy setting perspective. This has also been the subject of further

research and analysis within Study Two, which examines the authorising environment

and the policy setting framework which exists to guide or steer police performance. In

order for the Police Service to achieve optimum engagement in the policing of licensed

premises a range of capabilities must exist within an individual officer, but there must

also be organisational support for activity in a range of areas. Police powers, or policy

supporting this activity, is one, albeit significant, key to successful engagement in this

domain.

Research Question 6 is concerned with the barriers which prevent or reduce the

capability of police officers to effectively manage alcohol incidents both inside and

outside licensed premises. It is presumed that police officers do not police licensed

premises for a broad range of reasons. Unless the barriers are determined and strategies

implemented to address these, then the potential for police to enforce licensed premises

and reduce alcohol and other drug-related harm is diminished. In terms of quantitative,

responses, physical resources, time, safety for police, police support and organisational

support were amongst the most significant barriers identified. From a qualitative

perspective, a range of issues were identified by participants including crowding, levels

of intoxication, security staff being over-zealous, too noisy (can’t hear the police radio)

and lack of staff. Once the barriers or impediments were identified, participants were

asked what would need to occur to facilitate their giving licensed premises greater

137

prominence, to which they responded with the following: more support from

government, more commitment from other stakeholders, safer environments within

licensed premises, and more time. Understanding the barriers and ameliorating these is

but one factor that should be considered if the Police Service and government desire a

greater focus by police on the issues of licensed premises. In particular, clear and

unambiguous messages, not only from the hierarchy of the Police Service but also from

the highest levels of government, is of paramount importance and will be the subject of

further examination in Studies Two and Three.

There are a number of practical implications associated with these findings for

policing. The first such implication relates to the police organisations understanding the

importance of policing licensed premises and thereby developing a contextual

understanding of how difficult and complex such matters are from the perspective of the

operational police officer. The research identifies that officers attend significant

incidents where alcohol is a factor and that alcohol is a dimension of their response that

adds to the complexity and difficulty of responding. A further practical implication

relates to the means by which officers initiate their response. Police officers report

attending more incidents outside than inside licensed premises, and further that most of

the initiation to incidents, at least at the junior officer level, occurs from other sources

other than their self initiation. There is a significant opportunity here for police

agencies to upskill officers and encourage pro-activity in patrolling, particularly inside

such premises. Skill enhancement is likely to lead to elevated primary responses (self

initiation) by the individual officer concerned, and as such, this is seen as a significant

crime prevention strategy, since it prevents offences or at least intervenes at an earlier

stage in the violence and/or offending cycle. A further practical implication is the

potential for officers to use enforcement of the Liquor Act more effectively. The

literature, as has been outlined previously, has identified that officers are significantly

more likely to prosecute offences at the end-user level, in preference to higher order

offences at the supplier level. This research also confirms these previous findings. This

study provides an opportunity for police agencies to examine the practice of prosecuting

Liquor Act breaches. It is believed that re-orientating effort to prosecutions at the

licensed premises level is likely to have a significant effect on conforming behaviours

towards practices consistent with responsible service of alcohol. A further practical

implication of the research is the opportunity which exists to enhance the skill levels of

police officers. Self-identified knowledge of effective strategies is identified as

138

reasonably low and therefore much more could be done to enhance knowledge and skill.

Despite this, the training agendas of most police agencies are at capacity; therefore,

police agencies need to consider the opportunity costs associated with giving police and

Liquor Act training priority. This research also identifies that officer skill levels are

positively influenced by the imparting of skills and knowledge from other officers.

Given the significant impacts on formal training agendas, peer training is an important

opportunity for police organisations to explore, either as a replacement for, or to

augment, existing formal training. Enhancing skills in this context is likely to lead to a

range of organisational benefits, including enhanced presence, increased prosecutions at

the licensed premises level, greater officer confidence and correspondingly better public

(and officer) safety outcomes. The last practical implication for the research is the

opportunity for police to partner with others in the policing of licensed premises. Police

have important ‘legal levers’ (Mazerolle & Ransley, 2005) or authority influencing

factors, which other agencies can capitalise on effectively. Conversely, other agencies

that police regularly partner with have extraordinary powers that police can leverage off

effectively. Fortunately, this study identifies that police see enforcing the Liquor Act as

a shared responsibility and that partnerships with key agencies work to varying degrees.

There is greater opportunity for police to work with these agencies and it is believed

that this message needs to start from the top at the Government and senior levels of the

service.

As well as practical implications for these findings there are also theoretical

implications. The Three Circle Public Value Model (Alford, 1995) has assisted both in

framing the research questions and in facilitating the examination of the research

findings. Although the relevance of the model has been discussed previously, there are

aspects of Study One which have been enhanced through the application of such a

model. The primary focus of Study One is on the ‘public value’ dimension of the

model. The beliefs, perceptions, knowledge and skill of officers as they attempt to

achieve public safety outcomes (public value) has been the primary focus. The model

has been particularly instructive in understanding the impact on general duties officers

from the ‘authorising environment’, which includes the legislation, policy, senior officer

direction and government objectives. This program of research identifies that the

authorising environment is an important consideration in understanding the factors that

shape and constrain police behaviours relevant to the policing of licensed premises.

This is also the case in terms of the role of senior police and the government have in

139

making valuable resources (e.g. operational capability) available to officers to undertake

their roles effectively. The application of this model in this way is novel, as the author

has been unable to identify any other occasion where it has been similarly applied.

There are significant strengths associated with this study. In the first instance, as

has already been identified, the novel approach in utilising the Three Circle Public

Value Model to inform and shape the program of research is a significant strength. The

use of the limited existing studies (i.e. Findlay et al., 2000, 2002 & K. L. Smith et al.,

2001) to inform this program of research has added to the strength of the methodology

and corresponding findings. The high participant response rate is also a strength, given

that often police directed research suffers from low participation rates.

As well as strengths, there are potential limitations associated with this study.

Although considered a minor potential limitation, the generalisability of the findings to

other areas of Queensland, and in fact other areas in Australia and overseas, is a factor

for consideration. Despite the BCD being categorised as having a vibrant night-time

economy, the factors which make this area a worthy site for investigation are present in

other areas of Australia and indeed overseas.

5.6 Summary

This chapter discusses the research focus relevant to Study One. This includes

the investigation of strategies which officers utilise in policing both inside and outside

licensed premises. The chapter also examines the skill levels of officers and the level of

officer training provided. The source of officer knowledge and skill is likewise

examined, together with officer attitudes to the barriers which restrict or limit these

officers from undertaking more activity in the policing of licensed premises. Lastly, the

chapter discusses the attitude of participants with respect to partnerships with other

sectors involved in licensed premises. In particular, the success of these partnerships is

a key theme which connects all three studies (Studies One, Two and Three). This

chapter also examines issues associated with the strategies employed by police in the

policing of licensed premises, as well as perceived skill levels and training and the

barriers and impediments to policing such premises.

The next chapter examines the methodology and results of Study Two. This

second study examines the attitudes and perceptions of senior police, who are regarded

140

as key actors in terms of serving as a source of direction and authority when it comes to

the policing of alcohol-related incidents both inside and outside licensed premises.

141

CHAPTER SIX (STUDY TWO): QUALITATIVE RESEARCH WITH POLICE

EXECUTIVE

6.1 Introduction …………………………………………………..…... 142

6.2 Objective ………………………………………………………….. 142

6.3 Method ……………………………………………………………. 143

6.4 Results …………………………………………………………….. 147

6.5 Discussion ………………………………………………………… 163

6.6 Summary ………………………………………………………….. 167

142

6.1 Introduction

This chapter deals with the experience and beliefs of senior police managers with

respect to the policing of licensed premises within BCD. The purpose of this study is to

ascertain the view of those senior officers who operate at the District, Regional and

Corporate levels that make up the authorising environment (Alford, 2000; Moore,

1995). The beliefs of senior officers towards the efficiency and effectiveness of police

both inside and outside licensed premises is examined within this chapter.

This chapter also examines the understanding of senior police participants on a

broad range of issues associated with licensed premises. In particular, perceptions of

policing practice from the perspective of operational and strategic policy-setting and

practice are examined.

This study is informed by the Three Circle Public Value Model (Alford, 1995)

and particularly inter-relates to the ‘authorising environment’ and the ‘operational

capability’ components of the model. Through the identification and application of the

model to Study Two, greater clarity was obtained concerning the key role that senior

police provide in terms of setting the strategic and operational priorities of junior

(general duties) police. The other key dimension of the model (i.e. operational

capability) was also influential in understanding the importance of senior officers in

provisioning junior officers with the full suite of capabilities to achieve efficient and

effective policing outcomes. These two dimensions of the ‘model’ therefore caused

significant focus to be placed on senior officers as to how they contribute to the

facilitation of public value (e.g. public safety). Such contribution was examined

through the lens of the provision of their authority (authorising environment) and their

support for enhanced operational capability.

6.2 Objective

The authorising environment has the capacity to play a significant role in the way

in which police undertake their duties. Personnel that make up the hierarchical

decision-making levels within the organisation are important for strategic policy and

operational priority setting. The aim of Study Two is to determine the knowledge, but

more importantly, the attitudes that senior police have and the direction that they offer

in policing this dynamic and problematic context. A further and important aim of this

study is directed at the role that senior police have in terms of tactical/operational and

143

strategic policy setting when it comes to policing licensed premises. This will be

facilitated through an analysis of the data from Studies One and Two.

The following research question is relevant to the work in this study:

Research Question 7

What is the attitude of senior police of police knowledge, skills, attitudes and

capacity to reduce alcohol-related harm concerning licensed premises?

6.3 Method

Study Two consists of interviews with the three key areas (District, Regional and

Corporate) responsible for operational and strategic policy direction setting (refer to

Appendix 2). In the interests of clarity concerning the previously mentioned levels, the

District level relates to one encompassing area which contains a number of

establishments (e.g. police stations). Regions on the other hand consist of more than

one District and the Corporate level refers to the Commissioner and Deputy

Commissioner levels of the Police Service. The individuals operating within these

levels of the QPS are critical to setting the direction in terms of the nature of policing

that occurs within licensed premises and the outcomes that are desired. Such direction

can involve written policy directives and/or verbal direction, both of which can be

directive of certain police actions such as the nature, type and level of police

engagement both inside and outside licensed premises. Any examination of the

strategies employed by police concerning licensed premises is more comprehensive

where the policy setting as well as the operational and strategic mission, vision and

values are examined. The reason for this is that it is important to consider from where

police officers take their direction and whether those that are ultimately responsible for

the administration and functioning of the Service are perceived as influential in terms of

their ability to set operational policy which equates to practical on-the-ground strategies.

6.3.1 Ethical clearance

Ethical clearance for data collection for qualitative interviews was obtained from

the Queensland University of Technology Human Research Ethics Committee (QUT

Reference: 080000682).

144

6.3.2 Participants

This study utilised purposive sampling techniques (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005;

Guba & Lincoln, 1989) to enable the identification of key participants. The sample size

for the survey consisted of 11 sworn in officers. Although the sample size was not large

in number, it was a comprehensive sample as opposed to a representative sample. All

11 officers, including the Commissioner and two Deputy Commissioners, participated

(100% response) in the study (see Table 39). There is significant organisational

difficulty in accessing senior personnel for face-to-face interviews because of a range of

factors such as lack of time and availability and the challenges of having senior police

discuss policy issues, which are usually problematic for political and public interest

reasons. Personnel were informed that participation was purely voluntary, responses

would be treated with confidentiality and that they could choose not to answer a question

or cease participation at anytime during the interview. Consent was implied when

personnel verbally agreed to the interview.

The author held a senior executive position within the QPS (Assistant

Commissioner, Ethical Standards Command, QPS) during the data collection period.

Given this role and the capacity to influence the responses to the questions, an

independent and experienced research assistant was employed to facilitate the

questioning. The interviews were recorded in a semi-structured way using note taking,

from which transcripts were compiled. Pertinent comments around key research

questions of interest were recorded verbatim to allow accurate recording and analysis.

Table 39: Rank and position of QPS personnel interviewed Rank Position Of Participants

Corporate Level

Commissioner Commissioner of Police

Deputy Commissioner Deputy Chief Executive (Specialist Operations)

Deputy Commissioner Deputy Chief Executive (Regional Operations)

Regional Level

Assistant Commissioner Assistant Commissioner

Acting Chief Superintendent Operations Coordinator

Detective Superintendent Regional Crime Coordinator

District Level

Acting Superintendent District Officer

Inspector Patrol Services, Brisbane City Division

Inspector Patrol Services, Fortitude Valley Division

Detective Inspector Crime Services, Brisbane Central District Acting Inspector Support Services, Brisbane Central District

145

6.3.3 Procedure

The interview questions were developed having regard for key research themes

identified from the questionnaires (Study One). These themes related to issues which

included understanding the QPS role, Queensland Government expectations, QPS

expectations of officers, the participants personal vision, officer understanding of their

roles, effective strategies, effectiveness of industry partners, and other relevant

considerations. These questions were informed by the Three Circle Public Value

Model. Such questions were designed to focus upon the importance of the authorising

environment and operational capability components of the model and as they relate to

senior police officers. Questions were therefore constructed to ascertain the

participant’s views as to their knowledge of, but more importantly, their ability to

support operational police, in these two key dimensions. The public value part of the

model, which was such an important focus in Study One, was a key lens by which

senior officers comments were considered.

The questions relevant to Study Two were open-ended and designed to explore

the knowledge and attitude of the respective senior officer concerning various aspects of

policing licensed premises. The questions were reviewed with academic supervisors

and experienced researchers. Feedback was provided on structure and clarity of intent.

This process led to minor changes and inclusion of materials before pilot testing on

senior service personnel (n=2) not associated with the interview process.

The technique utilised in this instance was to employ a structured series of

interview questions (21 questions); however, there was scope for the interviewee to take

the interview outside of these direct question areas. Similarly, the open-ended question

at the conclusion allowed the officers to propose any additional issues of interest.

Face-to-face interviews of approximately one hour duration were conducted by

the research assistant. Each of the participants was provided with an interview schedule

prior to the interview. The schedule consisted of a series of semi-structured and open-

ended questions about perceptions and beliefs relevant to the police role in policing

licensed premises. During the interview the research assistant used probes to clarify

responses where necessary and to seek further information about participant’s

experiences concerning policing licensed premises.

146

Due to the sensitive political nature of the questions, the interviews were not

taped. Instead, notes of participants’ responses were taken by the research assistant

during the interview and attempts were made to capture key comments verbatim.

Before finishing the interview, the research assistant checked the validity of the notes

with the participants. This allowed the participants the opportunity to correct any

misunderstandings or to clarify points. These notes were then given a code in order to

further protect the anonymity of participants. Following the interviews, the research

assistant re-wrote and then typed the responses of the participants.

An investigative technique was employed whereby the author interviewed the

research assistant to extract the themes (thematic analysis process) from the interviews.

The information gathered from the participants was based partly on the principles of

grounded theory, which entails categorising participants’ responses into major coded

themes without preconceived ideas (Corbin & Strauss, 1990). The participants’

responses were re-read by the principal researcher a number of times utilising a

qualitative content analytic approach that was both comparative and constant (Strauss,

1987; Strauss & Corbin, 1997). This enabled the author to identify and document the

recurring themes.

As has been discussed previously, a thematic analysis (Van Manen, 1990) was

used to identify major and minor themes which emanated from participant responses.

In order to ensure accuracy of the identified themes and to mitigate the effects of bias,

an independent researcher also conducted a separate thematic analysis and findings

were compared with those of the research assistant. The themes were finally compared

within and across interviews in order to increase the reliability of the interpretations (i.e.

inter-rater reliability). The coded themes were devised to reflect the pre-determined

open ended and semi-structured questions. Additional codes were also constructed to

represent other relevant information obtained during the interview process. In

conclusion, both thematic analytical processes identified congruency with the findings,

which affirmed the final outcomes as being accurate.

6.3.4 Materials

A survey instrument consisting of 23 questions was developed and supplied to

each of the participants at least two days prior to the interview. Contained at the front

of the survey instrument was a detailed statement outlining the purpose of the study, the

147

rationale and other pertinent information relating to the voluntary nature of participation

and assurance of anonymity. A QUT Information Sheet was also provided to each of

the participants prior to the commencement of each interview. The information sheet

outlined the context of the research and once again stated the issues relevant to

participation and anonymity.

The questionnaire was developed by drawing upon the significant literature

review, examination and utilization of the Three Circle Public Value Model and

facilitation of an internal policing workshop involving senior officers (n=25).

The Three Circle Public Value Model, as has already been stated (refer to 6.3.3),

was influential in structuring questions specifically to identify the importance of senior

officers in terms of setting policy and direction (authorising capability) as well as

operational resourcing provision (operational capability). The internal police workshop

examined issues relating to the policing of licensed premises and key themes were

extracted from this to form the basis of the questionnaire. Examples of these themes

included discussions relating to the role of external stakeholders in the response to

alcohol-related incidents and licensed premises; the extent to which individual officers

had knowledge of the policy objectives of senior officers; and the belief systems of

officers working in this challenging policing context. External validity was achieved

through pilot testing (n=3) and advice obtained from academic supervisors. Other

support personnel were important in ensuring that structure, syntax and clarity was

maintained.

6.3.5 Data analysis

The responses to the key and direct quotes (identified with italics) are provided as

results. This gives a direct voice to the participants and also encapsulates their

individual perspectives (Muller et al., 2009).

6.4 Results

6.4.1 Understanding the QPS role

Participants (identified as ‘p’) were asked what they understood the QPS role to

be in policing licensed premises. Thematic analysis of participant responses identified

three key themes. The first theme related to public safety. Universally, all participants

have identified that the QPS role in policing licensed premises is to give effect to public

148

safety. This is typified by responses such as “ensuring public safety which incorporates

a range of activities” (p10), “preservation of peace and good order” (p5), and “there is

a legislative responsibility to keep the community safe” (p11) (refer to Table 40).

The other key themes related to proactive approaches and reactive approaches to

policing licensed premises. Participants recorded a range of responses for proactive

approaches analogous to partnerships particularly with Liquor Licensing and liquor

operators. These comments included “partnership approaches with licensing and

traders” (p4), “proactive in assisting licensees in operating their businesses” (p1) and

“proactive, working with other agencies to achieve public safety” (p2). Other

comments reflecting a proactive role for police were reflected by the following: “ensure

that traders don’t … endanger anyone’s wellbeing” (p8) and “early on in the evening to

have a high visibility to promote good behaviour” (p6).

In relation to the theme ‘reactive approaches’ the following comments refer to

the QPS role in taking decisive action consistent with the relevant legislative provisions.

These included “reactive in terms of enforcing the laws” (p1) and “enforce compliance

with the Liquor Act and Security Providers Act” (p3).

Table 40: Participant understanding of the QPS role in licensed premises Theme Participant Responses

Public safety generally

“ensuring public safety which incorporates a range of activities”

(p10) “to ensure licensees act responsibly” (p5)“preservation of

peace and good order” (p5) “to operationalise government priorities”

(p5) “about safety” (p8) “maintenance of public safety” (p7) “It is a

matter of public safety” (p2) “To enforce legislation and provide a

safe, secure environment for people to enjoy themselves” (p6) “There

is a legislative responsibility to keep the community safe” (p11)

“broader responsibility in terms of licensed premises” (p9)

Proactive approaches

“Partnership approach with licensing and traders” (p4) “ensure that

traders don’t break legislation or endanger anyone’s wellbeing” (p8)

“proactive in assisting licensees in operating their businesses” (p1)

“proactive, working with other agencies to achieve public safety” (p2)

“liaise with licensees and managers to promote proactive strategies

and best practice to prevent problems” (p3) “Early on in the evening

to have a high visibility to promote good behaviour” (p6)

Reactive approaches “reactive in terms of enforcing the laws” (p1) “reactive, legislative

(appealing to licensees to improve their game)”(p2) ”investigate

offences” (p2) “Enforce compliance with the liquor act and security

providers act” (p3)

p=participant

149

6.4.2 Officer understanding of their role

Participants were asked their views regarding the extent to which police officers

have a clear understanding of their role with respect to the policing of licensed premises

in BCD.

There was a high level of congruence in responses with all three levels (District,

Regional and Corporate) acknowledging that police officers have a reasonable to clear

understanding of their role. This was reflected in comments such as “yes, clear

understanding” (p5) and “pretty good understanding” (p9). One participant disagreed

with the proposition that officers have a clear understanding, stating “not really” (p6).

This participant (p6) indicated that they implemented quarterly training courses to

address this knowledge and understanding deficiency.

The major theme to emerge in terms of the perception of officer understanding

related to officer knowledge within BCD as opposed to other geographical areas of

policing. There was a divergence of views on this issue as reflected in comments such

as “state-wide understanding is low but in BCD it is high due to the number of licensed

premises” (p3), which confirms that the participant views BCD officers through

necessity and opportunity as having greater understanding. A contrary view was

expressed by one participant who although stating that police had a “pretty good level of

understanding”, stated “particularly good understanding in the bush but problematic

for busy places” (p9). It is understood that this participant was indicating that in busy

places like BCD, there were many more competing interests to challenge officer

attention than in rural and remote communities where perhaps there was more time to

engage in proactive crime prevention pursuits.

A further significant theme that emerged was that many participants believed

that LEAPS officers had much more clarity of understanding in terms of their role. This

was reflected in comments made by a Corporate participant who stated “specialist units

– very good understanding” (p9) and a District participant who stated, “rotating officers

through LEAPS Unit … then they come out with expert knowledge” (p1).

6.4.3 Queensland Government’s expectation

The major theme to emerge in the examination of the government’s expectation

was the mixed perception within and between police levels of the expectation of the

Queensland Government. At the Regional level, the belief that police should “provide a

150

safe environment” (p7) and “that all licensees comply with elements of licence

requirement” (p7) was coupled with the view that the “Valley has a carnival

atmosphere” (p4) and police should “show tolerance” (p4). This strong belief by one

Regional participant that police must remain aware of the “carnival atmosphere” (p4)

in which the Valley operates, was mentioned in conjunction with comments that patrons

should enjoy themselves but respect the rights of others. At the District level, responses

appeared conflicting in nature, with one participant holding the view that the

“government believes that the Service has responsibility for public safety” (p1) although

they also held the belief that “the government want to see a safe Brisbane, which comes

back to licensed premises doing the right thing” (p1). The perception of one District

participant that the government has a greater focus on being proactive rather than

reactive was supported by another District participant’s view that a priority of the

government is to be a “responsive government” (p6). The assumption by District

participants that the government’s intention is to be both proactive and responsive was

guided by the belief that government want to see police visible both inside and outside

licensed premises. This was identified by comments such as “government expects

police exposure at premises … expect visibility and very active Service” (p1). One

participant indicated that government had taken a “more hardline [approach] in recent

times” (p1) which appeared to be substantiated by the case in point that recent Office of

Liquor and Gaming Regulation (OLGR) decisions signify a willingness to pull industry

into line over breaches.

Although the previous suggestions are somewhat supported at the Corporate level,

there appears to be the equivocation that the government is not as hard line as it

portrays itself to be, as it is “reluctant to be too affirmative … secondary to income

generated … power of liquor and social community” (p9). On the contrary, other

Corporate level participants indicated that there is a “clear guide from government

about strategic direction of policing, sale of alcohol and licensed premises” (p5) and

that the Service is expected to “work with other agencies to contribute to the safety of

the community” (p10). Such conflict in the viewpoints at the Corporate level was the

most notable discovery from the inquiry into the government’s expectation of the

Service with the policing of licensed premises. It highlighted the disparity that exists

both within and between levels, but also highlighted the notion that communication of

such expectations within the Police Service may be ambiguous to some extent.

151

6.4.4 QPS expectation of officers

A variety of responses were yielded from the inquiry into what the Service

expects of its officers in relation to the policing of licensed premises. Four key themes

emerged from participant responses (refer to Table 41).

The first key theme centred around ‘tolerance and discretion’ and was identified

through participant responses such as “tolerance … police to be seen but unobtrusive”

(p4), “officers to use discretion with intoxicated people – officers have discretionary

power under the legislation” (p6), and “apply own experience and discretion” (p7). The

second key theme related to ‘early intervention’ which was discussed and explained by

participants in terms of preventative and proactive types of intervention. Comments

relevant to this key theme included “high visibility uniform control to have a dampening

effect on antisocial behaviour” (p11) and “early intervention and high visibility” (p8).

To continue this theme of early intervention and to explain the effect of police officers

not acting in a proactive way, one participant stated that it was important “not attracting

negative attention on police” (p7) as officers “don’t want the mood of the crowd to turn

on police” (p7).

The third key theme to emerge related to general duties police. One participant

suggested that general duties police are responsible to merely “go to complaints only”

(p10). This comment either disregards officers’ role in prevention or pro-activity or

alternatively views general duties police as being reactive only. Other comments in this

theme are “to respond as best as we possibly can” (p11) and “uniformed police do walk-

throughs to check for responsible service of alcohol and any grossly intoxicated people”

(p11).

The fourth and last significant theme to emerge related to the role of ‘specialist

police (LEAPS officers)’. There was a strong view held by participants that the skill

levels of specialist police are more significant than those of general police and this same

view is expressed within the context of the understanding by police of the QPS

expectation of officers. This is reinforced by participant comments such as “through

the LEAPS Unit providing support and guidance on the ground” (p1), “work with

employees in licensed premises and enforce the law” (p2) and “premises complying

with the full extent of the law” (p11).

152

Table 41: Participant understanding of the QPS expectation of officers Theme Participant Responses

Tolerance and discretion

“tolerance…police to be seen but unobtrusive” (p4) “act with

integrity, use their discretion” (p8) “officers to use discretion with

intoxicated people – officers have discretionary power under the

legislation” (p6) “apply own experience and discretion’ (p7) “even

handed but analytical approach to each scenario” (p7)

Early intervention “early intervention and high visibility” (p8) “high visibility uniform

control to have a dampening effect on antisocial behaviour” (p11)

“not attracting negative attention on police…don’t want the mood of

crowd to turn on police” (p7)

General Duties Police

“in terms of general police then go to complaints only” (p10)

“officers on the ground interacting with bar staff and security” (p1)

“to respond as best as we possibly can” and “uniformed police do

walk-throughs to check for responsible service of alcohol and any

grossly intoxicated people” (p11) “policing of good order” (p11)

Specialist Police

(LEAPS officers)

“however with LEAPS Unit then regularly monitor behaviour of

licensees, staff and patrons and collect accurate data in calls for

service of what they observe when they attend” (p10) “through the

LEAPS Unit providing support and guidance on the ground” (p1)

“work with employees in licensed premises and enforce the law” (p2)

“premises complying to the full extent of the law” (p11)

p=participant

6.4.5 Personal vision and communication of vision

There were mixed responses from participants relating to the question of their

personal vision. This is highlighted by the diversity of comments which came from

participants at the Corporate level, with some responses being more focused at the

macro-level and others at the micro-level. This made comparisons difficult and it is a

key point of difference between senior participants. Despite this observation, there were

three key themes to emerge concerning the personal vision of participants. These

themes have been titled ‘aspirational vision’, ‘outcome vision’ and ‘pragmatic vision

(refer to Table 42).

In terms of aspirational vision, there were a number of participants who spoke

passionately about a long term optimistic (aspirational) view about policing licensed

premises. These comments reflected in some cases a whole-of-society positive outcome

such as “a society that sees alcohol [like Europe] where there is no reliance on alcohol

to have a good time” (p9) and “providing a safe environment and for it [Valley area] to

be acknowledged as a safe place” (p6). Other aspirational vision statements related to

licensed premises specific matters such as “that premises manage themselves and to

take responsibility for the service of liquor to patrons” (p3). The key theme titled

153

outcome vision related to outcomes at the licensed premises level. One participant

commented “Minimise harm – in licensed premises so that patrons can enjoy a night

out … also for commercial aspects of the business” (p2). A further comment related to

this broad theme was “two-fold … from a proactive perspective, if there is a good

strong business that is responsible then customers can enjoy a night out and have a

positive experience … from a reactive perspective, are officers well conversed with the

law and are they confident with what they are doing” (p1).

The last major theme, titled pragmatic vision, captures comments which are less

aspirational in direction and more practical. Such comments included “safety of officers

is the primary concern and how we can do better” (p5), “the problem with licensed

premises is not inside the premises … the majority of serious incidents is outside

premises” (p7) and “would like to see something done about the sheer volume of people

in licensed premises … it is just a matter of time before there are multiple deaths due to

fire or explosion” (p11).

Table 42: Participant personal vision Theme Participant Responses

Aspirational vision

“a society that sees alcohol (like Europe) whereby there is no reliance

on alcohol to have a good time” (p9) “that premises manage

themselves and to take responsibility for the service of liquor to

patrons. (p3) “providing a safe environment and for it [Valley area]

to be acknowledged as a safe place” (p6)

Outcome vision

“if licensees complied with standards, then that would be great” (p10)

“public safety is number 1” (p4) “minimise harm – in licensed

premises so that people can enjoy a night out … also for the

commercial aspect of business” (p2) “two fold … from a proactive

perspective, if there is a good strong business that is responsible then

customers can enjoy the night and have a positive experience … from

a reactive perspective, are officers well conversed with the law and

are they confident with what they are doing” (p1)

Pragmatic vision

“safety of officers is the primary concern and how we can do better”

(p5) “ensure no service of underage drinkers” (p8) “need some way

of reducing queues as this is the majority of the problem” (p7) “the

problem with licensed premises is not inside the premises … the

majority of serious incidents is outside premises” (p7) “police should

only have to provide advice and to conduct audits” (p3) “would like to

see something done about the sheer volume of people in licensed

premises … it is just a matter of time before there are multiple deaths

due to fire or explosion” (p11) “gross number of people in the valley

on footpaths” (p11)

p=participant

154

The discussion regarding vision so far has focused on the personal vision of the

participant; however, they were also asked how they communicated this vision to junior

personnel at BCD. The comments of participants were analysed according to portfolio

areas (e.g. District, Regional and Corporate). All District level participants indicated

that this vision is without doubt communicated to their staff, through processes

including direction statements, shift objectives, lines controlled, management meetings,

successful prosecutions, and “lead by example”(p3) such as walk-throughs and

interactions with licensed premises (p3). At the Regional level, although two of the

three participants indicated that they had no line-control over any personnel (p7, p8)

both noted that their vision was communicated widely through their authority of rank.

The other participant indicated that expectations are conveyed at regular meetings and

that “overall, police are not attracting many complaints as they are performing their

duties as required” (p4). At the Corporate level, two participants remarked that their

visions get conveyed through the OPR process (p5, p10), with one participant stating

that this process ensures that it is “very clear where you stand” (p10). The remaining

Corporate participant indicated that due to information overload of officers, the

effectiveness of communicating such information and personal visions to officers is

likely to be poor (p9). Although the distinction was not made by Corporate participants,

this analysis may have been focused on the monitoring and enforcing of licensing laws

by general duties police rather than specialised police such as LEAPS officers.

6.4.6 Knowledge, skills and attitude to effect role

Participants were asked whether they believed police officers are equipped with

the requisite knowledge, skills and attitudes to undertake effective policing of licensed

premises. Four key themes emerged through the thematic analysis of the responses

(refer to Table 43). The first key theme related to ‘pre-Service training’, for which two

of the three participants indicated that such training was to a reasonably high level. For

example, “training at the academy is first class” (p8) and “education plus initial

training is really good” (p6). The other participant held a different view, stating

“officers only get a minimum standard when trained initially” (p2). Another key theme

related to in-Service training, with the vast majority of participants indicating scope for

improvement in this area, such as “more training would be good” (p8), “they are given

155

the majority of the skills but are not perfect at it” (p2) and “could be better but basically

on-the-job” (p3).

A further significant theme identified was defined as ‘generalist police’.

Responses within this theme capture participant views of skill levels of generalist police

such as “within BCD there is a process to upskill officers” (p10), “officers are

extensively trained and integrated in the Valley and CBD culture. It is an ongoing

thing” (p4) and “skill and attitude vary with experience” (p8). Some participants

commented on the demands on officers in understanding the legislative dimensions of

their role such as “there are so many pieces of legislation requiring specialised

training” (p10) and “knowledge in scenarios is very high but of legislation is moderate

at the junior level” (p7). Interestingly, one participant commented on the “new

generation of officers” and the challenge for older more experienced police. saying

“new generation of officers are very inquisitive and therefore keep senior management

on their toes as they have to ensure they know all the answers” (p6). The last key

theme related to the role of ‘specialist police (LEAPS officers)’ and comments around

this theme were “small specialist units have the required necessary knowledge, skills

and attitude … we need to move to formalise specialist units [to work with licensed

premises]” (p9).

156

Table 43: Participant perception of officer knowledge, skill and attitudes Theme Participant Responses

Pre-Service Training

“training at the academy is first class” (p8) “most of the work is

communication as officers only get a minimum standard when trained

initially” (p2) “education plus initial training is really good” (p6)

In-Service Training

“more training would be good” (p9) “officers are trained to give a

fine for consuming alcohol and public premises kick-out” (p2) “they

are given the majority of the skills but are not perfect at it” (p2)

“could be better, but basically on the job” (p3) “education plus initial

training is really good” (p6) “yes, have lots of training in legislation

and physical capacity – safe arrest techniques” (p11)

Generalist Police

“within BCD there is a process to upskill officers” (p10) “there are so

many pieces of legislation requiring specialised training” (p10)

“officers are extensively trained and integrated in the Valley and CBD

culture. it is an ongoing thing” (p4) “skill and attitude vary with

experience” (p8) “skill of officers is high to very high because

assaults on police are low” (p7) “knowledge in scenarios is very high

but of legislation is moderate at the junior level” (p7) “to a large

extent yes, due to a building up of knowledge” (p1) “driven by

incidents in premises being investigated and action taken” (p3) “new

generation of officers are very inquisitive and therefore keep senior

management on their toes as they have to ensure they know all the

answers” (p6)

Specialist Police

(LEAPS officers)

“small specialist units have the required necessary knowledge, skills

and attitude … we need to move to formalise specialist units [to work

with licensed premises]” (p9)

p=participant

6.4.7 Capacity of officers to impact on harm reduction

The capacity of officers to have a positive impact on harm reduction was

analysed according to the three strategic management levels (District, Regional and

Corporate). At the Corporate level, participants reported that the capacity of officers to

have an impact on harm reduction was evidenced through the provision of “diversion

strategies” (p5), leadership (role modelling) from the Police Service through

responsible drinking at in-house functions (p5), and “senior police personnel working

with industry to change attitudes to premise practices” (p10). Heavy handling by

officers and not treating people with respect were seen as key contributing factors that

could negatively impact on harm reduction (p5).

The major themes to emerge at the Regional level, which included “high

threshold of tolerance” (p7), “early intervention” (p8) (e.g. early in the night and ‘walk-

throughs’), and “partnerships” (p8) with the public and using discretion for each

scenario, were some strategies suggested by participants that have the potential to

reduce harm both inside and outside licensed premises. However, some participants

157

suggested that due to the small number of police in the large crowds (p8, p11), it would

be difficult to have either a positive or negative influence (p7). This view was not

shared by other Regional participants. One participant reported “it is easy to cause a

riot” (p4) and “it’s easy to accelerate a situation but difficult to decelerate one” (p4)

with regard to police having a negative influence on the capacity to reduce harm. Over-

zealous use of force by officers (p7), the use of police dogs (Drug Detection Dogs) (p4),

and low police presence (p8) were factors that were also raised by Regional participants

that could influence the impact of harm reduction efforts negatively.

Not surprisingly, at the District level there was a greater variety of responses as

to how officers may either positively or negatively affect harm reduction. Some

examples of positive factors included officers having “high visibility early in the night”

(p2) (such as being at railway stations at peak travel times) to detect people with a “bad

attitude” (p1), police having a positive attitude to “get the public on the right side”

(p1), and being proactive first then reactive if necessary (p3). It was suggested by one

District participant that “officers only escalate when they have to” (p1) and by another

that officers may at times be “overwhelmed by the sheer volume of crowds” (p11).

Other participants reported that, “if officers have lower tolerance with public” (p6) or

are complacent with breaches in licensed premises (p3), then these two factors were

believed to have a negative impact on harm reduction.

6.4.8 Barriers to effective harm-reduction

The identification of barriers which prevent or restrict officers from policing

licensed premises is a significant focus of this research. Naturally, the views of senior

police at the District, Regional and Corporate level are pivotal to a complete

understanding of this.

As a result of a thematic analysis of responses, four key themes emerged. The

first theme related to ‘police resourcing barriers’ (refer to Table 44). Many responses to

this theme identified problems relating to various dimensions of resourcing, such as

“difficulty to put energies into one focus given other priorities” (p10), “ratio of police

officers low” (p9), “diversity of policing” (p10), “demand for service and priority calls

for service and the level of human resources” (p5), “can’t put police officers on every

corner” (p10), “time is the biggest barrier (when processing someone arrested)” (p7),

“need to encourage officers to keep up the good work” (p2), and “time and competing

158

priorities – lack of confidence and knowledge – allegations of favouritism/corruption”

(p3). One participant, however, cited the workload of police as making the case for an

expansion of specialist police, stating “police are operating at capacity – a massive

expansion of LEAPS is required” (p11). There were some participants that held a

contrary view about the availability of resources for police as evident by the following

comments: “police powers are really good – move-on powers are really effective”

(p11), “they [police officers] have fantastic equipment” (p11), and “partnerships help

for blackspots” (p5).

A second major theme related to ‘societal barriers’ which captures a range of

responses, such as “advent of drugs” (p9), “democracy – police with the will of the

people” (p9), “lack of societal support for change” (p9), “bigger hope for the tobacco

industry compared with alcohol industry in relation to compliance” (p9), “large

crowds” (p7), and “their knowledge and acceptance of being tolerant” (p6).

The third significant theme is broadly termed ‘industry barriers’. Participants

reported the following relevant to the notion of barriers to police engaging with licensed

premises: “Irresponsible practice of licensees” (p9), “working with liquor industry to

modify behaviours” (p10), “can’t put police officers on every corner but partnerships

help for blackspots” (p5), and “public transport issues” (p9).

The fourth and last theme identified relates to ‘governmental and policy

barriers’. Relevant comments included “sheer volume and the number of premises”

(p4) and “government doesn’t want police inside licensed premises” (p11). One

participant insightfully commented, relating to the ‘ownership’ of the Liquor Act: “We

don’t own the liquor legislation. The Service may need to rethink that” (p1).

159

Table 44: Participant perception of barriers Theme Participant Responses

Police Resourcing Barriers

“police are operating at capacity – a massive expansion of LEAPS is

required” (p11) “ratio of police officers low” (p9) “diversity of

policing” (p10) “difficulty to put energies into one focus given other

priorities” (p10) “demand for service and priority calls for service

and the level of human resources” (p5) “can’t put police officers on

every corner ” (p10), but partnerships help for blackspots” (p5) “time

is the biggest barrier [when processing someone arrested]” (p7) “if

officers don’t have clear communication about what is required” (p2)

“if they don’t see results they get frustrated with outcomes” (p2) “if

they don’t have resources such as physical resources and training”

(p2) “need to encourage officers to keep up the good work” (p2)

“time and competing priorities – lack of confidence and knowledge –

allegations of favouritism/corruption” (p3) “ police powers are really

good – move-on powers are really effective” (p11) “they (police

officers) have fantastic equipment” (p11) “government doesn’t want

police inside licensed premises” (p11) “insufficient policing of

licensing laws inside clubs” (p11)

Societal Barriers

“advent of drugs” (p9) “democracy – police with the will of the

people” (p9) “lack of societal support for change” (p9) “bigger hope

for the tobacco industry compared with alcohol industry in relation to

compliance” (p9) “large crowds” (p7) “their knowledge and

acceptance of being tolerant” (p6)

Industry Barriers

“irresponsible practice of licensees” (p9) “working with liquor

industry to modify behaviours” (p10) “can’t put police officers on

every corner but partnerships help for blackspots” (p5) “public

transport issues” (p9)

Governmental And Policy

Barriers

“sheer volume and the number of premises” (p4) “we don’t own the

liquor legislation. The service may need to rethink that” (p1)

“government doesn’t want police inside licensed premises” (p11).

p=participant

6.4.9 Further opportunities to impact positively upon harm-reduction

Participants were asked to provide their opinions as to the strategies they would

like to see used more of in policing of licensed premises. Participant responses across

the three key areas (District, Regional and Corporate) provided their views, which were

divided into three key themes, namely ‘intuitive effective policing’, ‘partnerships’. and

‘policy and legislative issues’ (refer to Table 45).

In terms of the first of the significant themes, ‘intuitive effective policing’ the

following comments emerged particularly relating to intuitive policing: “being tolerant

and not being authoritarian … we want people to enjoy themselves in a safe

environment but knowing that police will handle any matter” (p6), “more discretion,

early intervention and high visibility” (p8), “maintain the right attitude to keep mood

160

right with the crowd leading to less police assaults” (p7), and “being up-to-date with

what is going on in their area” (p1). In terms of themes more allied to effective

pragmatic policing the following comments reflected this theme: “maintain current

policing style” (p4), “officers on the ground – to get them more confident about what

they can and can’t do” (p1), “use more liquor enforcement notices”(p1), “more police

‘walk-thru’ – high visibility, early intervention may improve crowd compliance later in

the night” (p1), and “operations targeting supply of liquor to intoxicated persons such

as plain clothes officers in premises enforcing responsible service of alcohol” (p3).

Of relevance to the second theme, ‘partnerships’, the following comments were

made by participants: “constrained by the resources of other agencies” (p10), “ability

to work with other agencies” (p10), “more communication with all stakeholders would

lead to everyone working together efficiently” (p7), “more interaction on the ground

with partners. They shouldn’t work in a silo” (p1), and “case management approach

meaning being proactive first by working towards a solution then bringing in other

agencies to help premises with issues to support their business” (p2). Interestingly,

participants almost unanimously identified that partnerships are integral in addressing

alcohol related harm within BCD.

The third and last major theme was termed, ‘policy and legislative issues’ and

was characterised by the following comments: “would like to see legislation that puts

more responsible onus on licensees” (p9), “political will not to use sniffer dogs” (p11),

and “covert operations – need to be policing inside” (p11). Regarding the comment on

the lack of support by government for drug dog deployment (p11), it was felt that the

negative publicity in the media that had occurred historically had caused concern within

government. The senior officer who reported that comment was sensitive to the

perceived view of government. This highlights the importance of the political

dimension in operational decision making and operational strategy formulation.

161

Table 45: Strategies officers should use Theme Participant Responses

Intuitive Effective Policing Partnerships

Policy and Legislative

Issues

“maintain current policing style” (p4) “more discretion, early

intervention and high visibility” (p8) “maintain the right attitude to

keep mood right with the crowd leading to less police assaults” (p7)

“being tolerant and not being authoritarian …we want people to enjoy

themselves in a safe environment but knowing that police will handle

any matter” (p6) “officers on the ground – to get them more

confident about what they can and can’t do” (p1) “use more liquor

enforcement notices”(p1) “more police ‘walk-thru’ – high visibility,

early intervention may improve crowd compliance later in the night”

(p1) “being up-to-date with what is going on in their area” (p1)

“ineffective policing of the drug environment” (p11) “operations

targeting supply of liquor to intoxicated persons such as plain clothes

officers in premises enforcing responsible service of alcohol” (p3).

“constrained by the resources of other agencies” and “ability to work

with other agencies” (p10) “more communication with all

stakeholders would lead to everyone working together efficiently” (p7)

“more interaction on the ground with partners. They shouldn’t work

in a silo” (p1) “case management approach meaning being proactive

first by working towards a solution then bringing in other agencies to

help premises with issues to support their business” (p2).

“would like to see legislation that puts more responsible onus on

licensees” (p9) “political will not to use sniffer dogs” and “covert

operations – need to be policing inside” (p11).

P=participant

6.4.10 Identification and impact of partners in harm reduction

The majority of participants from all levels were aware of the role that different

government and non-government agencies have in assisting police to enforce liquor

laws. A multitude of agencies were seen as playing important roles associated with

reducing alcohol and other drug-related harm in the policing of licensed premises. Such

agencies that were named included Liquor Licensing, Queensland Fire and Rescue,

Queensland Health, Queensland Transport, Queensland Rail, Brisbane City Council,

Queensland Ambulance Service, Office of Fair Trading, Taxi Council, Treasury and

Cabinet, Education Queensland, Queensland Injector Network, Liquor Accords,

Brisbane Youth Service, Brisbane Marketing, Brisbane Housing Company, Chambers

of Commerce, private security companies, night-watch chaplaincy, police liaison

officers and community elders. The comprehensiveness of the list was unsurprising

given the rank, level and experience of participants.

162

The responses were analysed according to organisational lines (Corporate,

Regional and District) (refer to Table 46). For the Corporate level, it was suggested that

there is a “varying degree of how they meet their obligations” (p5), although

maintaining and enhancing partnerships is seen to be very important. Another Corporate

participant suggested that although the majority of partners met their obligations

reasonably well, there is “more we can do” (p9) and “as long as we can keep moving

forward” (p9). At the Regional level, it was generally accepted that most partners met

their obligations (p4, p8), although one participant stated that “licensees don’t meet

their obligations as such, as they allow their customers to get drunk” (p7). Most

District participants suggested that the majority of traders are genuinely concerned

about issues due to commercial profitability, even though one participant indicated that

some traders put “profits before safety” (p2). At the District level, participants largely

agreed that “generally speaking, they all understand their responsibility” (p2) and “they

all have small parts to play but if they do their part, it will work for everyone” (p2).

Table 46: Perceived effectiveness of stakeholders Theme Participant Responses

Corporate

“Reasonably well…but need to communicate better…more that we

can do” (p9) “a more coordinated response between partnerships

would be good” (p10) “Varying degree of how they meet their

obligations” (p5) “More we can do…as long as we can keep moving

forward” (p9)

Regional “they meet obligations competently” (p4) “I think it is a high degree”

(p8) “Licensees don’t meet their obligations as much, as they allow

their customers to get drunk…others though, not too badly” (p7)

District

“Varying degree. Some are more willing than others” (p1)

“Something in it for everybody” (p1) “Generally speaking they

understand their responsibility” (p2) “they all have small parts to

play but if they do their part, it will work for everyone” (p2) “Office of

Liquor and Gaming Regulation does, but others not always” (p3) “All

agencies work together well…but have their own operating

limitations” (p11) “Liquor Licensing are ineffective in enforcing the

Act” (p11) “profits before safety” (p2)

p=participant

163

6.5 Discussion

The aim of this study is to determine the knowledge, and attitudes, that senior

police have and the direction that they offered to those police who are tasked with

policing licensed premises. The study also examines the role that senior police have in

terms of tactical/operational and strategic policy setting in the policing of such

premises. A comprehensive search of the international literature has not identified any

other research focused on the attitudes and views of those at the strategic and policy-

setting level such as this study does, despite the fact that there is a significantly growing

body of research relating to policing and licensed premises generally. The data derived

from the interviews of key participants at the three strategic management levels of the

Service (District, Regional and Corporate), was analysed using thematic analysis

processes, as has been previously described. Through the utilisation of this process a

number of key themes and findings have been extracted from the data.

The first key theme related to the QPS role, and importantly, officer role in

policing licensed premises. Participants at all three strategic management levels had a

high degree of congruence as to the Service role, which was to ‘enhance public safety’.

Participants also recorded a range of ancillary roles consistent with reactive approaches

(e.g. investigating offences and enforcing the law) and proactive approaches (e.g.

partnerships). Although research has identified that intelligence-led, proactive policing

is the most effective form of policing (Sherman, 1997), police participants were

generally cognisant that this proactive approach was at times an onerous undertaking.

With respect to beliefs as to whether police officers have knowledge and understanding

of their roles (as opposed to the QPS role) concerning licensed premises, participants

reported most commonly that officers had reasonable to clear understanding of their

role. Participant comments also were supportive of the view that officers operating in

the research area (BCD) had a clearer understanding of their role than did police

operating in other areas. There was one dissenting view expressed however, indicating

that in rural areas there was better understanding of officer role than in busier, more

operationally vibrant places. The dissenting comment is most probably related to a

belief that in rural locations there is more community contact which falls into a

narrowly defined community policing style of engagement.

The second major theme that emerged was the knowledge and capability of

specialist police compared with general duties police. In fact a number of the responses

164

to a variety of questions differentiated specialist and general police in a range of

domains. One such example related to clarity of understanding of officer role.

Participant responses were supportive that specialist police (LEAPS officers) had more

clarity of understanding in terms of their role than generalist police. Participants also

held strong views that specialist police had higher skill levels to deal with issues inside

and outside licensed premises. There were views expressed by some participants that

general duty police undertook purely response related activities, or alternatively, dealt

with lower order matters. Conversely, specialist police undertook more complex tasks

having regard for their higher levels of knowledge and skill.

The third significant theme that emerged was concerned with the identification of

barriers which serve to restrict or prevent police officers from policing licensed

premises. Participant responses were strongly supportive that there was a diversity of

resourcing barriers which restrict police from undertaking their roles in licensed

premises. Examples of such barriers were the lack of police and the low ratio of police

to patrons, lack of time, and lack of investment in skills and knowledge acquisition.

There were some participants however, who argued that police equipment in BCD was

appropriate and officers were equipped with sufficient powers (policy and legislation).

Again, the issue of specialist police was raised by one participant who believed that

increasing the numbers of specialist police would ameliorate the problem of police

officers policing licensed premises. Although this participant did not elaborate it is

believed that this senior officer was referring to the lack of desire on the part of

generalist police to police licensed premises given their self-identified lack of

knowledge and skills, and lack of confidence in using what is seen as a specialist body

of legislation. In support of this assumption, Doherty and Roche (2003) indicate that

liquor laws are complex through their intention to meet competing interests and are

often confusing and frustrating. Interestingly, some participants pointed to

governmental and policy barriers that existed, such as the sheer volume of licensed

premises and the lack of ‘ownership’ by the QPS of the Liquor Act 1992.

The final theme related to the opportunity and capability of police to leverage off

external partnerships to give effect to a reduction in harms concerning licensed

premises. Police working in partnership in BCD was seen as an effective harm

reduction strategy and strongly supported by the participants. All participants exercised

a high degree of knowledge as to who these partners were and could articulate

government, non-government and community groups precisely. Equally, the majority

165

of participants also held strong views that the partnerships were reasonably effective

and worked to varying degrees, depending on the nature of the partnership and issues

such as resourcing. These senior officers also identified that better communication and

coordination would potentially strengthen these partnerships.

There are a number of practical implications of these findings for policing.

Arguably, the most significant is the belief of senior officers of the importance of

having officers with high degrees of skill, specifically in relation to the policing

licensed premises. The findings are strongly supportive of officers with specialist

capability and therefore LEAPS officers have been recognised by senior officers as

being highly efficient in the policing of what is identified as a highly variable and

difficult policing context. The practical implication for policing is, therefore, how to

increase the numbers of LEAPS officers, which is problematic given the pressure on

finite human resources and the limited opportunities to influence training. As has been

discussed previously, the police training agenda is always under significant stress and

there is an opportunity cost created by making specialist training a priority. If it is not

possible to increase the number of LEAPS officers, then an alternative strategy may be

to enhance the skill levels of existing police to encourage them to actively police

licensed premises. The increase in the number of LEAPS officers and the enhancing of

skills in general duties police are not mutually exclusive concepts. In an optimum

environment both these strategies would be priorities, particularly given the impacts on

public safety, and importantly, officer safety. A further practical implication of the

findings of this study relates to the importance of and opportunities for partnerships.

Despite the view of senior officers that partnerships are ‘reasonably’ effective, there are

significant opportunities for improving such relationships. Theoretically, these

relationships are forged at officer level and take the form of practical operational inter-

personal types of associations. However, senior officers at the strategic level of

organisations can have a significant positive impact on inter-agency relationships,

leading to positive collaboration.

As well as the practical implications for these findings there are also theoretical

implications. The Three Circle Public Value Model (Alford, 1995) has been useful in

both framing the research questions, and further, helpful in facilitating the examination

of the research findings. Although the relevance of the model has been discussed

previously, it is important to identify that, in terms of Study Two, senior officers are

extremely important in achieving public safety (public value) when it comes to policing

166

licensed premises. Senior officers provide two important key influencers (i.e.

authorising environmental factors and operational capability) which, unless they are

present, public value can not be realised. Had it not been for the identification and

application of the Three Circle Public Value Model, it is unlikely that this Study would

have been directed in this manner. Alternatively, had it been undertaken, then the focus

on ‘senior officers vision/direction’ and ‘operational capability relevant-issues’ would

most probably not have been a key feature of the study. The case is therefore made that

the theoretical model utilised in this program of research is highly relevant to the

context of policing generally and licensed premises policing specifically,

There are significant strengths associated with this Study. In the first instance,

the approach adopted is novel in that it examines the attitude and beliefs of senior

officers relevant to the policing of licensed premises and this has not been undertaken

previously. Despite the burgeoning body of literature on the subject of licensed

premises, much of which is recent, the author of this thesis is unable to find an instance

of similar research, focused on senior officers. A further strength is the choice and

theoretical fit of the chosen model. This model, as has been discussed, has strengthened

the structure and refined the outcomes of this study. Despite the fact that this model has

been utilised in a range of contexts, there has not been an occasion identified in which

the model has been applied within the context of policing.

It could be construed that there is a minor potential limitation relevant to this

study and this relates to the seemingly small sample size. Although small in number

(n=11), this is a comprehensive sample of relevant senior officers. All relevant senior

officers having responsibilities of leadership and supervision were invited to participate,

and, in fact, did so. Therefore, there was no further opportunity to increase the sample

size.

A final potential limitation associated with this research centres around the

potential bias of the author given that he is a member of the QPS and a person with

considerable experience (over 30 years) and further has considerable experience in the

subject of licensed premises policing. To overcome the perception and actuality of bias,

a research assistant completely independent of the academic supervisory team facilitated

the interviews with participants. The researcher also undertook the initial coding of the

responses to the questions. The detailed analysis was then undertaken by the author.

This process had recognition for bias but allowed the experience of the author to be

applied to the analysis of the thematic responses.

167

6.6 Summary

This chapter explored the attitudes and perceptions of senior police officers at the

District, Regional and Corporate strategic management-levels of the Police Service. All

of these officers have relevance to policing activities which occur within BCD. The

interviews provided an important insight into the ‘authorising environment’ of a Police

Service from the perspective of their strategic operational and policy-setting

perspectives relevant to the policing of licensed premises. There are a number of

themes or findings which emanate from this study, and the four key areas of

investigation relate to the following areas: (1) the QPS role and officer role, (2) the

knowledge and capability of specialist police compared with general duties police, (3)

the identification of barriers which serve to restrict or prevent police officers from

policing licensed premises, and (4) the opportunity and capability of police to leverage

off external partnerships to give effect to a reduction in harms both inside and outside

licensed premises.

The next chapter discusses the methodology and results of Study Three. This

study conducted a complementary examination of the attitudes and perceptions of

external stakeholders. This diversity of individuals contributed significantly to an

appreciation of the police role in policing licensed premises. No examination of police

role and industry in this important area would be complete without an understanding of

the views and perspectives of external stakeholders, particularly those within the alcohol

retail industry.

168

CHAPTER SEVEN (STUDY THREE): QUALITATIVE RESEARCH WITH

EXTERNAL STAKEHOLDERS

7.1 Introduction ……………………………………………………….. 169

7.2 Objective ………………………………………………………….. 169

7.3 Method ……………………………………………………………. 169

7.4 Results …………………………………………………………….. 175

7.5 Discussion ………………………………………………………… 195

7.6 Summary ………………………………………………………….. 199

169

7.1 Introduction

This chapter examines the understanding of the police role in the policing of

licensed premises from the perspective of the external industry stakeholder. It also

ascertains the nature and level of interaction between police and this group of

stakeholders. The stakeholders were asked their perceptions of policing practice and

their beliefs in terms of effective strategies which are capable of being deployed by

police in addressing alcohol-related harm. This chapter also identified the partnerships

that exist within BCD and explores the nature and function of the partnership between

police and stakeholders in the regulation of licensed premises.

7.2 Objective

As has been indicated previously, it is important to this research to examine the

attitudes and beliefs of external stakeholders who have involvement or a stake in the

regulation of the licensed premises environment. The reasons for this are diverse, but

include the belief that external stakeholder views provide balance to the introspective

QPS views, provide a deeper analysis of core issues, and validate the findings of Studies

One and Two, which are exclusively internal police views. A broad range of

representative areas were considered and invited to participate as has been previously

discussed (see Section 6.4.10).

The following research question is relevant to this final study:

Research Question 8

What is the attitude of those within the broader liquor industry (government, non-

government and community but exclusive of police) of police knowledge, skills,

attitudes and capacity to reduce alcohol-related harm concerning licensed premises?

7.3 Method

7.3.1 Ethical clearance

As with the previous study (Study Two), the QUT Ethics Committee approved

this research (QUT Reference: 0800000682). Ethical clearance was not required by the

QPS Research Committee given that this study was concerned with interviewing

participants external of the Service.

170

7.3.2 Participants

This part of the study utilised purposive sampling techniques (Denzin & Lincoln,

2005; Guba & Lincoln, 1989) to enable the identification of key participants. These

participants were stakeholders in the effective management of licensed premises from a

government, non-government (business and community) perspective within BCD and

were therefore able to provide important comment on various aspects relevant to the

policing of such premises. A total of 26 interviews were conducted at two time points

(refer to Table 47 and Section 7.3.3)

Table 47: Personnel interviewed Interviewee Time 1 Time 2

Industry Representatives

Casino 1 Nightclub 4 3 Hotel/Bar 1 2 Security Providers 3 Government Representatives

Liquor Licensing 1 Brisbane City Council 3 Queensland Fire and Rescue Service 1 Office of Fair Trading 1 Division of Workplace Health and Safety 1 Queensland Ambulance Service 1 Other Representatives

Royal National Association 1 Queensland Hotel Association 2 Chaplain Watch 1 Total 12 14

7.3.3 Procedure

A structured series of interview questions were formulated. Face-to-face

interviews of one hour duration were conducted by the independent research assistant.

Each of the participants was provided with an ‘interview schedule’ (copy of questions)

refer to Appendix 5). The schedule consisted of a series of semi-structured and open

ended questions about perceptions and beliefs relevant to the police role in policing

licensed premises. During the interview probes were used to clarify responses where

necessary and to seek further information about participants’ experiences concerning

policing licensed premises.

A list of a diverse group of potential stakeholders that had both knowledge and

likely interest in participating in these interviews was arranged through local police

171

references. In early 2008, approximately 34 invitations to take part in an interview were

forwarded to a diversity of stakeholders. A total of 12 interviews were conducted at this

time. Due to concerns with the reasonably low sample size, a further tier of invitations

were offered to a broader range of stakeholders. Again, senior police within BCD were

consulted concerning appropriate and likely interviewees. In July–August 2009, a

further 28 requests for interviews were disseminated to a range of stakeholders. From

this round a total of 14 interviews were facilitated. Part way through the interviews and

due to lack of take-up of further interviews, some limited snowball sampling occurred

in which one interviewee from the Queensland Hotels Association (QHA)

recommended a number of others operating in the liquor industry as willing

participants. Such interviews were facilitated. A total of 26 interviews were conducted

at the two time points.

Given the rank and position of the principal researcher it was methodologically

and ethically unsound to have self-interviewed these stakeholders, because of the

potential for tainting the results. As with Study Two, it was therefore necessary to

employ an independent research assistant to facilitate the interviews. A similar

methodological approach was adopted in Study Two. The interviews were conducted

utilising structured questions. A total of 22 questions were asked; however interviewees

were not constrained to answer just these questions (see Appendix 4). The effect of this

was to provide a further point of reference for the research and to consider the range of

relevant responses from the perspective of the senior strategic and operational personnel

(Study Two) and that of the external stakeholder (Study Three). These questions were

informed by the Three Circle Public Value Model in that they were formulated to

explore the importance of the authorising environment (senior police), operational

capability, and the public value (public safety) components of the model as they relate

to external stakeholders’ perceptions of police practice. Questions were therefore

constructed to ascertain the participant’s views as to their knowledge of operational

police in these three key dimensions as articulated in the model. The public value part

of the model, which was such an important focus in Study One, was a key lens by which

external stakeholders’ comments are considered.

The procedure adopted by the research assistant was to conduct the interviews

and to record responses using note taking, and recording, where possible, verbatim

responses to questions. Audio recordings were not used given the sensitive nature of

the interviews, the participants involved and the fact that the research was occurring

172

under the auspices of the Police Service. The research assistant was encouraged by the

principal researcher (author) to allow participants to depart from the questions and

provide any information that the interviewee determined relevant. In fact a significant

number of the interviewees adopted this course. The richness of the responses

facilitated by this flexible response process provided endorsement for this approach.

Before finishing the interview, the research assistant checked the validity of the

notes with the participants. This allowed the participants the opportunity to correct any

misunderstandings or to clarify points. These notes were then given a code in order to

further protect the anonymity of participants. Following the interviews, the research

assistant re-wrote and then typed the responses of the participants.

An investigative technique was employed whereby the author interviewed the

research assistant to extract the themes (thematic analysis process) from the interviews.

The information gathered from the participants was based partly on the principles of

grounded theory, which entails categorising participants’ responses into major coded

themes without preconceived ideas (Corbin & Strauss, 1990). The participants’

responses were re-read by the principal researcher (author) a number of times utilising a

qualitative content analytic approach that was both comparative and constant (Strauss,

1987; Strauss & Corbin, 1997). This enabled the principal researcher to identify and

document the recurring themes. An investigative technique was employed whereby the

author interviewed the research assistant to extract the themes (thematic analysis

process) from the interviews.

As has been discussed previously, a thematic analysis (Van Manen, 1990) was

used to identify major and minor themes within the notes of the participants’ responses

to questions. In order to ensure accuracy in this identification, an independent

researcher also conducted a thematic analysis and findings were compared with those of

the research assistant. The themes were finally compared within and across interviews

in order to increase the reliability of the interpretations. The coded themes were devised

to reflect the study’s pre-determined open ended and semi-structured questions.

Additional codes were also constructed to represent other relevant information obtained

during the interview process.

173

7.3.4 External reliability and validity process

In developing the methodological approach for Study Three, a concern was

encountered relating to the potentiality for bias and its impact on validity. The

potentiality for bias was identified at three stages: the interview, interrogation of data,

and/or write up of results phases. In order to ameliorate this, two specific strategies

were implemented. The first strategy involved the participation of an experienced

research assistant to facilitate the interviews and conduct a preliminary thematic

analysis of results. The second was the validation by an external and independent

researcher to ensure there were no discrepancies between raw interview data and the

resulting thematic analysis. The selected reviewer was not a member of the supervisory

team and was selected primarily because of their skill and competence, but also

importantly because of their lack of police research contact. This therefore was a

strategy to potentially remove bias from the process.

The role of the external and independent reviewer was therefore to provide

further objective analysis and advice on issues of validity and reliability. This ensured

that the research had cognisance for trustworthiness, was rigorous and represented

quality outcomes (Golafshani, 2003). This external and independent researcher was

provided with the methodology information, interview transcripts, thematic analysis

workings and theme outcomes. The analysis identified that the methodology was sound

and that research findings were congruent with interview notes and the outcomes of the

thematic analysis process. As such, no discrepancies were found.

7.3.5 Materials

A survey instrument consisting of 22 questions was developed and supplied to

each of the participants at least two days prior to the interview. Contained at the front

of the survey instrument was a detailed statement outlining the purpose of the study, the

rationale and other pertinent information relating to the voluntary nature of participation

and assurance of anonymity. A QUT Information Sheet was also provided to each of

the participants prior to the commencement of each interview. The information sheet

outlined the context of the research and once again stated the issues relevant to

participation and anonymity. Such information was a stipulation of the QUT Ethics

Committee as well as the QPS Research Committee.

174

The survey questionnaire was developed by drawing upon the significant

literature review and a facilitation of internal policing workshop involving senior

officers (n=25). The internal police workshop examined issues relating to the policing

of licensed premises and key themes were extracted from this to form the basis of the

questionnaire. Examples of these themes included discussions relating to the role of

external stakeholders in the response to alcohol-related incidents and licensed premises,

the extent to which individual officers had knowledge of the policy objectives of senior

officers, and the belief systems of officers working in this challenging policing context.

External validity was achieved through pilot testing (n=3) with other police who were

external to the research area and through advice obtained from academic supervisors.

Other support personnel were important in ensuring that structure, syntax and clarity

were maintained.

The Three Circle Public Value Model provided a great degree of clarity with

respect to Studies One and Two in terms of the direction of key research questions.

Where this model was instructive, in terms of Study Three, was that it provided clarity

in terms of the scope of the potential interviewees. Study Three involved external

stakeholders critically examining the entirety (all three circles) of the model. Given the

focus on operational capability and authorising environment it also limited the potential

interviewees to only those who had relevance and theoretical knowledge of how

policing actually occurs within the licensed premises context. The invitations to

participate in an interview therefore extended to those who operated at the industry level

(e.g. casino, nightclub & hotel operators), government level (e.g. state & local

government representatives); and other representatives (e.g. Queensland Hotels

Association, Royal National Association, etc.). Had the model not provided that degree

of clarity, the research focus would have been more on operational policing outcomes

(e.g. focused on the public value proposition). The effect of this would have been to

potentially expand the the number of interviewees, but would have diluted the result.

Such dilution would have occurred because the focus would have been merely on

policing outcomes, and therefore would have potentially lost the focus of the

authorising environmental factors influential on officers as well as their operational

capability factors.

175

7.3.6 Data analysis

The responses to the key themes are provided as results and in many cases, direct

quotes, which are identified with italics. This gives a direct voice to the participants and

also encapsulates their individual perspective (Muller et al., 2009).

7.4 Results

7.4.1 Understanding the QPS role

The role of the QPS in the policing of licensed premises in BCD was seen by the

external participants as consistent with four key themes (refer to Table 48). The first

key theme was ‘enforcing laws and enforcement’ and was typified by comments such as

“law and enforcement” (p19, p20), “ensuring safety by ensuring compliance with

regulations” (p23), and “they are the primary government agency to ensure that

provisions of Liquor Act is maintained throughout the State” (p1). Another pertinent

comment in this theme was “licensed premises are highly regulated – don’t smoke,

don’t stand here, don’t drink there” (p5). Two further important themes were identified

as ‘proactive approaches’ and ‘reactive approaches’. In terms of ‘proactive approaches’

the following comments were made: “QPS has a multitude of roles such as consultation

of license applications, proactive approaches (LEAPS), early intervention of offenders

for minor offences to prevent them from engaging in more violent offences” (p21),

“regular uniformed police presence is a definite plus” (p18), “to support the operators

of licensed premises” (p5), and “police try to work with you, but limited as to what they

can do” (p6). Concerning the theme ‘reactive approaches’, the following comments

were made: “to remove trouble makers such as patrons” (p26), “we don’t like to call

the police too much, as you are then seen in a lesser light” (p26), “monitor crowd

controllers” (p15), and “assist liquor licensing” (p15). Interestingly, there were a

number of positive comments made about the reactive capability and pressures on

police, including: “the response rate by police is brilliant” (p25) and “feel for and pity

police officers … we call them if very urgent as they are the last line of call” (p20). The

last major theme related to ‘public safety generally’ and was typified by the following

comments: “maintaining peace and order” (p23), “responsible for public order” (p9),

and “they have a role in the setting of standards of behaviour” (p24).

176

Table 48: Participant understanding of the QPS role in licensed premises Theme Participant Responses

Enforcing Laws and

Enforcement

“law and enforcement” (p19;p20) “ensuring safety by ensuring

compliance with regulations” (p23) “they are the primary government

agency to ensure that provisions of Liquor Act is maintained

throughout the state” (p1) “police have to administer laws that

shouldn’t be there” (p3) “strictly what police should be doing –

maintaining law and order” (p4) “law enforcement of the Liquor Act”

(p14) “they are part of the liquor compliance regime” (p7) “licensed

premises is highly regulated – don’t smoke, don’t stand here, don’t

drink there” (p5) “ensuring venues operated under the Liquor Act”

(p13) “adhere to the rules of liquor licensing and fair trading” (p6)

“interested in compliance with conditions of permit” (p8) “police are

there to enforce liquor licensing legislation” (p10) “monitor liquor

licensing requirements and detection of offences” (p24) “I don’t

believe police should be in venues … plain clothes officers are ok in

venues and also liquor licensing … patrons don’t want to be watched”

(p25) “police don’t have enough powers” (p20) “already have liquor

licensing, don’t need a LEAPS Unit … beef up liquor licensing” (p4)

“incidents need to be reported and investigated if charges are to be

laid” (p13).

Proactive Approaches “QPS has a multitude of roles such as consultation of license

applications, proactive approaches (LEAPS), early intervention of

offenders for minor offences to prevent them from engaging in more

violent offences” (p21) “Regular uniformed police presence is a

definite plus” (p18) “to support the operators of licensed premises”

(p5) “police try to work with you, but limited as to what they can do”

(p6) “Liaison with other agencies” (p9) “LEAPS Unit to provide

specialist knowledge to assist licensed premises and security guards”

(p22) “Coordinated responses to areas” (p12) BCC work with QPS in

joint ‘raids’” (p12).

Reactive Approaches “to remove trouble makers such as patrons” (p26) “we don’t like to

call the police too much, as you are then seen in a lesser light” (p26)

“monitor crowd controllers” (p15) “assist liquor licensing” (p15) “to

protect staff in WHS when attending compliance checks” (p16)

“police assist with any patrons breaking nightclub rules” (p2 “we

don’t call police for minor things” (p2) “unless they get more

numbers their role can only be reactive” (p25) “drunk and disorderly

issues, illicit drugs, underage drinkers” (p11) “the response rate by

police is brilliant” (p25) “feel for and pity police officers … we call

them if very urgent as they are the last line of call” (p20).

Public Safety Generally “maintaining peace and order.” (p23) “responsible for public order”

(p9) “they have a role in the setting of standards of behaviour” (p24).

p=participant

7.4.2 Officer understanding of their role

There was a high degree of congruence in the responses of the external

participants relating to the question of officer understanding of their role to police

licensed premises (refer to Table 49). Three key themes emerged which related to the

roles of ‘general duties police’, ‘specialist police (LEAPS Unit)’, and ‘senior police’.

In terms of the first main theme to emerge, ‘general duties police’ was typified by

the following comments: “Charlotte Street – some junior officers that don’t have the

experience” (p1), “general police have no idea … LEAPS officers understand their

177

role” (p6), “new officers don’t always have knowledge of the legislation” (p2), “yes but

some police [particularly females] get quite fearful of some aggressive patrons [patrons

smell fear]” (p20), “some police don’t have the experience or the knowledge … some

officers have a clear understanding though” (p23), “yes, they are switched on” (p2),

and “to a degree … some officers are very well trained and are very knowledgeable”

(p21).

Despite the views of some participants that general duty police have limited

knowledge and skills to police licensed premises, there was congruence in comments

relating to specialist police (e.g. LEAPS officers) as identified through the following

comments: “general police have no idea … LEAPS officers understand their role” (p6),

“generally no … LEAPS Unit have good understanding and knowledge” (p7), “very

good understanding (LEAPS Unit)” (p8), “each unit is different – but LEAPS Unit have

a good understanding of their role” (p13), and “LEAPS Unit are all pretty good” (p18).

The last important theme to emerge related to ‘senior police’ and was reflected in

the following comments: “at a senior level – good understanding. At operational level

– very narrow focussed and don’t always understand the big picture” (p9) and “not

always clear – Beat officers are happy to come to a venue but don’t always. Senior

police have clearer view” (p26).

178

Table 49: Participant understanding of officer role in licensed premises Theme Participant Responses

General Duties Police “Charlotte Street – some junior officers that don’t have the

experience” (p1) “Yes, they are switched on” (p2) “new officers don’t

always have knowledge of the legislation” (p2) “police are very

patient and tolerant” (p2) “I’d say so” (p5) “officers advise hotel to

call them if there are any problems, but then works against hotel when

they apply for license renewal” (p5) “general police have no idea

…LEAPS officers understand their role” (p6) “At a senior level –

good understanding. At operational level – very narrow focussed and

don’t always understand the big picture” (p9) “Generally police have

a good understanding but occasionally might over-step the liquor

licensing boundary [e.g. police might advise to get more security staff

at venues]” (p10) “LEAPS Unit – definitively have the knowledge and

right attitude” (p11) “by and large, yes. … they are well aware of the

actions they have to take” (p12) “Each unit is different – but LEAPS

Unit have a good understanding of their role” (p13) “In general yes –

clear understanding of enforcement” (p14) “Yes but some police

[particularly females] get quite fearful of some aggressive patrons

[patrons smell fea])” (p20) “To a degree… some officers are very

well trained and are very knowledgeable” (p21) “Good understanding

particularly LEAPS” (p22) “Some police don’t have the experience or

the knowledge … some officers have a clear understanding though”

(p23).

Specialist Police (LEAPS

Unit)

“Casino Crime Unite – have a clear understanding as they are

experienced officers” (p1) “general police have no idea … LEAPS

officers understand their role” (p6) “generally no … LEAPS Unit

have good understanding and knowledge” (p7) “very good

understanding [LEAPS Unit]” (p8) “Each unit is different – but

LEAPS Unit have a good understanding of their role” (p13) “LEAPS

Unit are all pretty good” (p18).

Senior Police “At a senior level – good understanding. At operational level – very

narrow focussed and don’t always understand the big picture” (p9)

“Not always clear – Beat officers are happy to come to a venue but

don’t always. Senior police have clearer view” (p26).

p=participant

7.4.3 Queensland Government’s expectation

There were a variety of responses when participants were asked their opinion

about the expectation from the Queensland Government as to the policing of licensed

premises (refer to Table 50). These comments were centred around three key themes.

The first such theme identified that the vast majority of participants held a negative or

sceptical view of the Queensland Government. The theme identified therefore was

‘negative views of the government’s expectation’ and included comments such as the

following: “don’t think they really know” (p26), “not sure” (p5) and “don’t think they

know what they are doing … they are very reactive to things” (p21). Some further

comments in this theme related to tensions that exist in terms of the government’s

priorities and activities relating to policy regarding licensed premises. This was

179

characterised by the following comments: “government profits versus police tolerance

– the tension is always going to be there” (p25), “expectation differs at different time

points” (p14), and “can’t keep fining licensed premises – focus needs to shift to

patrons” (p22).

A further important theme to emerge relates to ‘regulation of the industry’ and

was highlighted in the following comments: “regulated to the roof” (p26), “government

– police should enforce what liquor licensing need to happen” (p10), “maintains safety

of patrons (including outside and public affected by patrons)” (p9), and “the

government expect officers to use resources to ensure a safe environment and to be

visible and engage with security and licensees” (p21). The final theme relates to ‘law

and order’. The following comments by participants highlight those issues identified:

“government expects that police will ensure the Liquor Act is complied with and

maintained” (p1), “objectives under the Act … to minimise harm” (p7), and “one of

community safety … public have faith in police” (p24).

180

Table 50: Participant understanding of the government’s expectation Theme Participant Responses

Negative Views of

Government Expectation

“Influence of police getting stronger in the licensed premises” (p3)

“New Q’ld liquor laws – saved the government a fortune in policing”

(p3) “wasting of government resources on minuscule things” (p4)

“Don’t think they really know” (p26) “not sure” (p5) “alcohol is a

legal product” (p7) “Expectation differs at different time points”

(p14) “Increase revenue and balance offences” (p14) “Control all the

violence … Police don’t necessarily have the power though” (p16)

“The government is not down at the grass roots level … they have no

idea of the issues” (p18) “Government are not aware of the

problems” (p18) “Government have tried to fix a problem that can’t

be fixed. Need experienced police to do this” (p20) “Government

don’t follow the harm minimisation concept” (p20) “Not just an

alcohol problem but a cultural problem of aggression” (p20) “So

regulated but people still get hurt” (p20) “Most political aspect for

QPS” (p14) “That agencies will work collaboratively … some

ineffective enforcement of licensed premises by liquor licensing” (p12)

“Don’t think they know what they are doing … they are very reactive

to things” (p21) “There is high regulation of licensed premises …

taking government out of the limelight” (p22) “No education to the

public about patron responsibility” (p22) “Need more LEAPS

officers” (p22) “Can’t keep fining licensed premises – focus needs to

shift to patrons” (p22) “Don’t know… I don’t think they know what is

required” (p23) “Government react to press and media” (p25)

“Government profits versus police tolerance – the tension is always

going to be there” (p25).

Regulation of the Industry “police presence around licensed premises is fantastic” (p5)

“Regulated to the roof” (p26) “Government – police should enforce

what liquor licensing need to happen” (p10) “should be the same as

the QPS expectation” (p6) “I provide them with information with

regard to fire safety and numbers [overcrowding]” (p8) “once

legislation comes in, it will be compulsory – legislation overdue” (p8)

“maintains safety of patrons [including outside and public affected by

patrons]” (p9) “work with other agencies … can’t be addressed by

any one agency” (p9) “A lot of agencies have a role to play” (p11)

“The government expect officers to use resources to ensure a safe

environment and to be visible and engage with security and licensees”

(p21) “One of issue management … through Liquor Licensing’s

appropriate structures” (p24).

Law and Order “Government expects that police will ensure the Liquor Act is

complied with and maintained” (p1) “law and order” (p2)

“Government expects a police presence and high visibility on Friday

and Saturday nights” (p2) “police responsible to maintain law and

order outside premises where we (business) have no authority” (p4)

“objectives under the Act … to minimise harm” (p7) “Ensuring no

under-age drinking and no illegal activity” (p13) “The ultimate

sanction is the suspension of a license” (p12) “Want to be seen to be

enforcing Liquor Act” (p14) “One of community safety … public have

faith in police” (p24).

p=participant

181

7.4.4 QPS expectation of officers

The beliefs of the participants in relation to QPS’s expectation of officers were

somewhat varied. A number of important themes were identified in this area (refer to

Table 51). The first theme related to ‘tolerance and discretion’ and is highlighted

through the following comments: “remaining calm and professional in the case of

incredible provocation” (p12), “there is an expectation of being tolerant but if there is

an offence then it needs to be dealt with appropriately” (p24), “tolerance of patrons …

however this builds disrespect for authority and disrespect for police” (p1), and “one of

tolerance … not worth their while to go through all the paperwork as offenders often

get off anyhow” (p26). The second key theme related to ‘compliance with legislation

and policy’ and is reflected in the following comments: “that police officers ensure that

the Act is complied with” (p1), “police responsible to maintain law and order outside

premises where we [business] have no authority” (p4), “uphold the laws of liquor

licensing” (p6), “carry out their duties … of peace and good order” (p9) and

“maintaining peace and order. Ensuring safety by ensuring compliance with

regulations” (p23). Interestingly, one participant commented sceptically on an issue of

government revenue and police resourcing, through the following comment: “license

costs have risen but no extra police resources provided” (p3).

The third important theme to emerge related to ‘early intervention and pro-

activity’ and was reflected by the following comments: “to assist and rectify problems –

expect officers to sort the problems out” (p2), “need a significant proactive force and

there has to be some regulations so as not fudging numbers” (p3), “moving towards a

more proactive method … greater police presence early in the evening” (p11),

“ensuring public presence to create deterrence … visual deterrence is best” (p24) and

presence is a good deterrent as there is a perception of community safety” (p12). The

fourth and last key theme related to ‘general duties police’. A range of responses were

provided on this issue, which were characterised by the following comments: “expect

officers to have a good knowledge of licensing issues and be proactive, which they are”

(p8), “Valley as a specific need and officers should be educated and have specific

training” (p3), “comes down to officer’s personality – some officers have their finger

on the pulse and others don’t” (p5) and “should be handpicked in a way”(p3).

182

Table 51: Participant understanding of the QPS expectation of officers Theme Participant Responses

Tolerance and Discretion

“remaining calm and professional in the case of incredible

provocation” (p12) “there is an expectation of being tolerant but if

there is an offence then it needs to be dealt with appropriately” (p24)

“tolerance of patrons … however this builds disrespect for authority

and disrespect for police” (p17) “tolerance to patrons” (p20) “police

need to maintain the tension of tolerance” (p25) “one of tolerance …

not worth their while to go through all the paperwork as offenders

often get off anyhow” (p26).

Compliance with

Legislation and Policy

“that police officers ensure that the Act is complied with” (p1) “police

responsible to maintain law and order outside premises where we

[business] have no authority” (p4) “uphold the laws of liquor

licensing” (p6) “carry out their duties … of peace and good order”

(p9) “enforce legislation, but make sure people are safe” (p10) “law

enforcement” (p22) “enforce laws – the only expectation” (p14)

“maintaining peace and order. Ensuring safety by ensuring

compliance with regulations” (p23) “license costs have risen but no

extra police resources provided” (p3) “wasting of government

resources on minuscule things” (p4).

Early Intervention and

Proactivity

“to assist and rectify problems – expect officers to sort the problems

out” (p2) “need a significant proactive force and there has to be some

regulations so as not fudging numbers” (p3) “expect officers to have a

good knowledge of licensing issues and be proactive, which they are”

(p8) “police to be vigilant” (p10) “moving towards a more proactive

method … greater police presence early in the evening” (p11) “police

presence is a good deterrent as there is a perception of community

safety” (p12) “to show respect and be provided with full assistance

from management at premises” (p13) “try to minimise occupational

violence” (p16) “take a proactive approach, be responsive, follow due

process and make use of their powers and resources” (p21) “ensuring

public presence to create deterrence … visual deterrence is best”

(p24).

General Duties Police

“should be handpicked in a way”(p3) “Valley as a specific need and

officers should be educated and have specific training” (p3) “comes

down to officer’s personality – some officers have their finger on the

pulse and others don’t” (p5) “expect officers to have a good

knowledge of licensing issues and be proactive, which they are” (p8)

“largely relying on numbers of police” (p11) “security and police

have a similar role … QPS have more powers to enforce the law”

(p23) “don’t think QPS has an overall one, but Districts do” (p7).

p=participant

7.4.5 Personal vision and communication of vision

Participant vision was an area that was also investigated. Participants were

asked their personal vision with respect to the policing of licensed premises. A range of

mixed responses were received. These responses were categorised into a number of

themes (refer to Table 52). The first such key theme related to ‘industry vision and

strategies’ and was typified by the following comments: “personal vision – needs to be

a joint effort by all organisations” (p16), “would like to see calls for service data used

183

better as there is always this unknown” (p6), and “should have individual premises risk

profiles – their regulatory compliance should be matched to their history of incidents”

(p17). Other comments in this theme related to tangible resources such as technology,

such as “to see technology used better” (p11) and “ID scanners need to be networked

and should be mandatory regulation imposed by Liquor Licensing” (p25).

The second theme was identified as ‘police capability and relationships’ and was

reflected in two distinct views. One such view was positive of police capability and

relationships with external stakeholders, such as “police need greater powers and

greater police presence in the Valley … police presence is a good deterrent” (p19),

“hooning legislation has improved compliance by offenders – three strikes and you are

out” (p17) and “strengthening the working relationships” (p7). There were, however,

significant negative comments relating to police, such as “to get stronger, more

evidence-based comments by police” (p7), “irresponsible service of alcohol – police

don’t really have a role to play” (p11), “common sense needs to prevail with police …

some officers take advantage of their role and are over-zealous” (p18) and “when I

want police it is hard to get them there … prompt call outs are important” (p18).

The third important theme, related to ‘patron responsibility’ and was reflected in

the following comments: “patrons – greater responsibility on individuals” (p11),

“QHA would like to see greater focus on personal accountability and person control by

patrons” (p17), “need to increase patron responsibility and need mandatory penalties

for assaulting police” (p21), “zero tolerance … offenders are verbally and physically

disrespectful” (p26), and “culture of binge drinking which is a social and political

issue” (p9). The fourth and last significant theme related to ‘staff capability’, which is

highlighted by the following participant comments: “to have responsible service of

alcohol programs – staff trained and have certificates” (p1) and “need compliance

standards otherwise many managers would take advantage of lots of things in the

industry” (p18).

184

Table 52: Participant personal vision Theme Participant Responses

Industry Vision and

Strategies

“to try to ensure that disorderly patrons don’t enter premises” (p1)

“at times have problems with intoxicated patrons outside” (p1) “try to

ensure safety and well-being of patrons coming/going from premises”

(p1) “to have all incidents documented by Monday morning and

provide all of this to police” (p2) “to see a Code of Conduct for entry

etc for all of industry” (p2) “to have networked ID scanners” (p2)

“would like to see calls for service data used better as there is always

this unknown” (p6) “To see technology used better” (p11) “ensure

licensed premises comply with license obligations” (p8) “Responsible

service of alcohol” (p16) “Personal vision – needs to be a joint effort

by all organisations” (p16) “Should have individual premises risk

profiles – their regulatory compliance should be matched to their

history of incidents” (p17) “Current penalties are not enough of a

deterrent” (p20) “Need a proactive approach – such as early

intervention” (p20) “ID scanners need to be networked and should be

mandatory regulation imposed by Liquor Licensing” (p25)

“Perception of community safety is about visible deterrence” (p24)

“becoming concerned about further laws and more regulations. Need

to stop regulating and start a management plan” (p25) “should have

3am finish times everywhere” (p5).

Police Capability and

Relationships

“police become more involved with ensuring that intoxicated people

aren’t roaming streets of premises” (p1) “everything we do is strict

and so controlled” (p2) “to get stronger, more evidence-based

comments by police” (p7) “strengthening the working relationships”

(p7) “to get a working protocol of the way that they comment” (p7)

“irresponsible service of alcohol – police don’t really have a role to

play” (p11) “irresponsible licensees get the licences suspended”

(p12) “hooning legislation has improved compliance by offenders – 3

strikes and you are out” (p17) “common sense needs to prevail with

police … some officers take advantage of their role and are over-

zealous” (p18) “when I want police it is hard to get them there …

prompt call outs are important” (p18) “police need greater powers

and greater police presence in the valley … police presence is a good

deterrent” (p19) “police need to remember that some of their

strategies [such as sniffer dogs for drugs] in venues can push people

out onto streets where it is more dangerous for them” (p24)“need

more meaningful relationships between police and security guards”

(p24) “no sniffer dogs near venues – patrons just ingest all drugs in

their possession and greater risk of overdose” (p25).

Patron Responsibility “patrons – greater responsibility on individuals” (p11) “QHA would

like to see greater focus on person al accountability and person

control by patrons” (p17) “need to increase patron responsibility and

need mandatory penalties for assaulting police” (p21) “need more

patron responsibility” (p22) “patron behaviour … need to strengthen

the penalties” (p26) “zero tolerance … offenders are verbally and

physically disrespectful” (p26) “culture of binge drinking with is a

social and political issue” (p9).

Staff Capability “to have responsible service of alcohol programs – staff trained and

have certificates” (p1) “Need compliance standards otherwise many

managers would take advantage of lots of things in the industry”

(p18).

p=participant

185

7.4.6 Knowledge, skills and attitude to effect role

Opinions elicited regarding police having the necessary knowledge, skills and

attitude to perform their duties effectively in the policing of licensed premises, were

comparable to ‘clarity of role definition’. There was a range of key themes that

emerged regarding this important facet of the research (refer to Table 53). The first

theme related to ‘generalist police’ and is reflected in the following comments: “Yes,

general police that come out to the hotel … no issues with these officers” (p5), “police

attitudes are fantastic but there is lack of numbers in the Valley” (p6), and “police are

tolerant to a point … always ready to help out” (p8). Within this theme a number of

sub-themes emerged relating to training as evidenced by the following comments:

“police who are called to licensed premises must have better training in the Liquor Act

as it is a very extensive document” (p22), “the Liquor Act comes down to

interpretation” (p22), “training would seem to be good” (p25), and “training is very

good, but too tolerant … need to have zero tolerance” (p26). The second important

theme that emerged is ‘specialist police (LEAPS Unit)’ of which participants were

overwhelmingly supportive of their knowledge, skills and attitudes, which was

reinforced through the following comments: “LEAPS Unit – very switched on and very

supportive of our job” (p2), “LEAPS really good. Police on the beat are not as good or

as experienced” (p20), “LEAPS Unit – very happy with how they manage things”

(p13), and “LEAPS Unit – very good” (p14).

The next key theme related to the experience and attitude of police for which

there were a range of comments, both positive and negative, such as “experience and

local knowledge account for a great deal’ (p8), “attitude very positive” (p8), “not

consistent between officers” (p21), “in the CBD the attitude (of officers) is very good”

(p21), “generally pretty good. Occasionally want more police there … as they might

want to get more overtime” (p10), and “police are almost purely about public safety”

(p7). The final significant theme related to ‘senior officers and leadership’ and

comments provided identify the importance of sound and effective leadership as well as

the quality of leadership within BCD at the time of the interview, such as “well adjusted

at senior levels. Operational level … need to be persuaded” (p9), “whole spirit is

186

dependent of the spirit of the leader” (p12), and “seem to be very good leaders within

police at present” (p21).

Table 53: Participant perception of officer knowledge, skill and attitudes Theme Participant Responses

Generalist Police

“officers outside of the Casino Crime Unit don’t have the knowledge

of the legislation” (p1) “yes, general police that come out to the hotel

… no issues with these officers” (p5) “police attitudes are fantastic

but there is lack of numbers in the Valley” (p6) “police are tolerant to

a point … always ready to help out” (p8) “Beat officers have very

good attitudes but sometimes no common sense” (p18) “police who

are called to licensed premises must have better training in the Liquor

Act as it is a very extensive document” (p22) “the Liquor Act comes

down to interpretation” (p22) “training would seem to be good” (p25)

“training is very good, but too tolerant … need to have zero

tolerance” (p26).

Specialist Police

(LEAPS officers)

“yes – very experienced officers in the Casino Crime Unit” (p1)

“LEAPS Unit – very switched on and very supportive of our job” (p2)

“LEAPS really good. Police on the beat are not as good or as

experienced” (p20) “LEAPS Unit – very happy with how they manage

things” (p13) “LEAPS Unit – very good” (p14).

Experience and Attitude of

Police

“experience and local knowledge account for a great deal’ (p8)

“attitude very positive” (p8) “not consistent between officers” (p21)

“in the CBD the attitude (of officers) is very good” (p21) “generally

pretty good. Occasionally want more police there … as they might

want to get more overtime” (p10) “police are almost purely about

public safety” (p7).

Senior Officers and

Leadership

“well adjusted at senior levels. Operational level … need to be

persuaded” (p9) “whole spirit is dependent of the spirit of the leader”

(p12) “seem to be very good leaders within police at present” (p21).

p=participant

7.4.7 Capacity of officers to impact on harm reduction

There were a number of opinions as to how police officers could impact

positively on reducing harm regarding licensed premises. The major theme to emerge

related to ‘police presence and pro-activity’. A significant number of participants

identified that the presence of police has a significant effect on reducing harm with

regards to licensed premises which was reflected in the following comments: “having a

police presence on the streets assists the casino” (p1), “if they interact with people and

are tolerant” (p2), “greater police presence equals less issues in the Valley” (p3),

“police presence acts as a deterrent” (p5), and “everyone is trying hard, including

police … not enough police though” (p23).

There was a further theme to emerge which related to ‘resourcing’. Examples of

relevant comments included “time is their (police) greatest barrier” (p19), and

187

“sophistication of communication technology is excellent … all stakeholders are in

close contact for quick responses” (p17).

7.4.8 Barriers to effective harm reduction

There were numerous perceptions and beliefs held by participants as to the

potential barriers for officers taking a more active role in the policing of premises. An

examination of the important themes identified that there were five discernable main

themes emanating from the participant comments (refer to Table 54). The first of the

key themes related to the ‘lack of police human resources’ and was apparent in

comments, such as “limited human resources” (p1), “lack of police personnel” (p14),

“clearly police are outnumbered … in the entertainment precinct, everyone is

overwhelmed” (p17), “need enough police numbers … need more in the Valley” (p19),

“everyone is trying hard … not enough police though” (p23), “police resources – they

have enough powers but can’t enforce them enough” (p23), and “police are too tolerant

… overwhelmed by the crowd” (p23).

The second major theme to emerge related to police resourcing, other than human

resources. This was reflected in the theme, ‘other police resourcing limitations’ and

included the following comments: “new computer systems (QPrime) that takes up more

time and is affecting ability of police to get out of the office” (p1), “right number of

staff that are trained appropriately” (p12), “time for charging patrons might take 2

hours” (p12), “time is their greatest barrier” (p14), and “QPS is expected to be so

many things … sheer volume of officer’s responsibilities” (p7). Not every participant

held the view however that there were barriers to effective harm-reduction, which was

reflected in the following comments: “shouldn’t be any barriers” (p26), “very little

barriers because of the location of venue … very good police numbers as the police

stations is just around the corner” (p18), “no barriers really” (p10), and “don’t think

any barriers” (p8). Some participants reported that licensed premises were potential

sources of police corruption. Such comments were identified as follows: “Fitzgerald

reform and the enduring attitudes from that era is a barrier to police” (p21), and

“opportunity for corruption with licensed premises and police can be fearful of being

too involved with licensed premises” (p21).

188

The third major theme to emerge related to ‘industry barriers’ which were

identified in the following comments, namely “liquor retail lobby group” (p9), “lack of

ID scanners … would be less time spent chasing individuals” (p11), “CCTV – lack of it

makes it difficult to get documentation from police” (p13), and “perception portrayed

by media that licensed premises are run by dodgy nominees” (p14). One participant

remarked although that “so many things are wrong … it’s not the police’s fault” (p3).

Another key theme to emerge related to ‘societal barriers’, which was reflected in the

following comments: “need to be able to clearly quantify the impact of harm from

alcohol” (p9), and “over-crowding … personal space issues such as more eye contact

creates some aggression” (p24).

The final theme to emerge related to ‘governmental and policy barriers’. A range

of diverse comments were made by participants concerning legislative and

governmental policy issues and are reflected in the following quotes: “barriers not

within police control – political and economic control” (p9), need better move on

powers … need tougher penalties” (p2), “misinterpretation of increase in license fees

… there is a perception by some that it is related to number of ‘calls for service’ log”

(p22), and “need more on the spot fines for offenders” (p23).

189

Table 54: Participant perception of barriers Theme Participant Responses

Lack of Police Human

Resources

“limited human resources” (p1) “lack of police personnel” (p14)

“limited human resources” (p5) “simply not enough officers” (p6) “at

times, lacking police numbers” (p8) “clearly police are outnumbered

… in the entertainment precinct, everyone is overwhelmed” (p17)

“need enough police numbers … need more in the valley” (p19)

“everyone is trying hard … not enough police though” (p23) “police

resources – they have enough powers but can’t enforce them enough”

(p23) “police are too tolerant … overwhelmed by the crowd” (p23)

“police have good powers” (p12).

Other Police Resourcing

Limitations

“new computer systems (QPrime) that takes up more time and is

affecting ability of police to get out of the office” (p1) “requirements

of State Crime Operations – Casino Crime Unit may get criticism

from crime operations for being involved in offences under the liquor

act” (p1) “police have other priorities” (p1)) “right number of staff

that are trained appropriately” (p12) “licensed environment creates

evidentiary issues” (p12) “time for charging patrons might take 2

hours” (p12) “more floating around would be good” (p2) “time is

their greatest barrier” (p14) “perception as being over-policed”

(p16) “people expect too much of police to stop incidents” (p16)

“human resources – e.g. just one priority on a long list” (p7) “QPS is

expected to be so many things … sheer volume of officer’s

responsibilities” (p7) “police are too tolerant … overwhelmed by the

crowd” (p23) “need more police to respond. More plain clothes

police would be helpful” (p25) “shouldn’t be any barriers” (p26)

“very little barriers because of the location of venue … very good

police numbers as the police stations is just around the corner” (p18)

“no barriers really” (p10) “don’t think any barriers” (p8)

“Fitzgerald reform and the enduring attitudes from that era is a

barrier to police” (p21) “opportunity for corruption with licensed

premises and police can be fearful of being too involved with licensed

premises” (p21) “we have offered to pay police (special duties) but

this has been rejected” (p19) “police should be available for hire on a

Friday or Saturday night. This hotel wants special police privately

paid but gets knocked back” (p5).

Industry Barriers

“Liquor retail lobby group” (p9) “lack of ID scanners … would be

less time spent chasing individuals” (p11) “CCTV – lack of it makes it

difficult to get documentation from police” (p13) “perception

portrayed by media that licensed premises are run by dodgy

nominees” (p14) “sheer volume of patrons” (p16) “need better

commitment between partnerships” (p3) “so many things are wrong

but it’s not the police’s fault” (p3).

Societal Barriers

“need to be able to clearly quantify the impact of harm from alcohol”

(p9) “sheer volume of patrons” (p16) “over-crowding … personal

space issues such as more eye contact creates some aggression”

(p24).

Governmental and Policy

Barriers

“barriers not within police control – political and economic control”

(p9) “need better move on powers … need tougher penalties” (p22)

“police don’t have the powers to keep violent assault offenders from

Friday night away from venues on Saturday night” (p20)

“misinterpretation of increase in license fees … there is a perception

by some that it is related to number of ‘calls for service’ log” (p22)

“need more on the spot fines for offenders” (p23).

p=participant

190

7.4.9 Further opportunities to impact positively upon harm-reduction

Participants were asked how police could utilise opportunities to impact

positively upon harm reduction. A range of responses to this question were identified

and were categorised into three main themes (refer to Table 55). The first key theme

was identified as ‘intuitive effective policing’ and was reflected in the following

comments: “more beat patrons to get rid of unduly intoxicated people off the street –

got to get people off the street for their own welfare” (p1), “greater police presence at

cab ranks – makes them safer” (p1), “police presence acts as a general deterrence”

(p5), “more police in licensed venues … QHA welcomes this as police are a deterrent”

(p17) and “visible and regular presence is important…walk throughs are important.

Patrons are deterred by police presence” (p21). Additional to comments about police

presence, participants also commented “don’t want to always see 50 police hanging

around venues” (p16), “be proactive rather than reactive. Identify individuals in

queues that could be problematic” (p9), “assess each premises on an individual basis –

not one shoe fits all idea” (p17) and “needs discretion, but also needs to be less

tolerance of anti-social behaviour. Police need to have the authority and power to deal

with offences” (p21).

The second key theme to emerge related to ‘partnerships’, which was strongly

captured in the following comments: “for police to get more involved in partnerships –

as this usually gets problems sorted out” (p1), “providing licensed premises with advice

… they have to see their own legal advice as police won’t give it to them” (p6),

“integrating police data with all the other agencies data” (p11), “if sharing more data,

more action could be taken” (p7), and “using security guards in conjunction with police

to add strength to numbers” (p23). The last major theme is referred to as ‘policy and

legislative issues’. A range of comments were made by participants, including: “would

like to see more Liaison Officers” (p16), “would like to see police have the powers to

shut a premise down [rather than just Fire and Rescue] … when words get out the

police can shut a place down, it would improve performance in the industry” (p16),

“co-operative relationship with security and management” (p21), “police need to have

the authority and power to deal with offences” (p21), “more on the spot fines … stops a

lot of problems” (p22) and “lock-out great initiative” (p12). One industry participant

191

believed that the issue was not related to alcohol but illicit drugs: “chasing wrong

ponies – need stiffer penalties for sellers of drugs” (p3).

Table 55: Strategies officers should use Theme Participant Responses

Intuitive Effective Policing

“more beat patrons to get rid of unduly intoxicated people off the

street – got to get people off the street for their own welfare” (p1)

“greater police presence at cab ranks – makes them safer” (p1)

“sniffer dogs occasionally would be beneficial” (p2) “ID scanners

would cut violence dramatically” (p2) “being proactive in the street is

better than reactive” (p3) “more detection of people selling drugs and

detection of drugs” (p3) “police presence acts as a general

deterrence” (p5) “street presences [police public safety tea]) quite

good” (p8) “be proactive rather than reactive. identify individuals in

queues that could be problematic” (p9) “early intervention” (p9)

“police presence is a very good deterrent” (p10) “heat maps – like

Victoria Police” (p11) “moving people on” (p12) “don’t want to

always see 50 police hanging around venues” (p16) “more police in

licensed venues … QHA welcomes this as police are a deterrent”

(p17) “assess each premises on an individual basis – not one shoe fits

all idea” (p17) “visible and regular presence is important … walk

throughs are important. Patrons are deterred by police presence”

(p21) “needs discretion, but also needs to be less tolerance of

antisocial behaviour. Police need to have the authority and power to

deal with offences” (p21) “zero tolerance – need to make arrests.

There is currently zero tolerance on venues but not on patrons” (p26).

Partnerships “for police to get more involved in partnerships – as this usually gets

problems sorted out” (p1) “providing licensed premises with advice

… they have to see their own legal advice as police won’t give it to

them” (p6) “integrating police data with all the other agencies data”

(p11) “if sharing more date, more action could be taken” (p7) “using

security guards in conjunction with police to add strength to

numbers” (p23).

Policy and Legislative

Issues

“chasing wrong ponies – need stiffer penalties for sellers of drugs”

(p3) “lock-out great initiative” (p12) “would like to see more Liaison

Officers” (p16) “would like to see police have the powers to shut a

premise down [rather than just Fire and Rescue] … when words get

out the police can shut a place down, it would improve performance in

the industry” (p16) “co-operative relationship with security and

management” (p21) “police need to have the authority and power to

deal with offences” (p21) “more on the spot fines … stops a lot of

problems” (p22).

p=participant

7.4.10 Identification and impact of partners in harm reduction

Not surprisingly, the majority of participants were aware of the role that

different government and non-government agencies had in assisting police enforce

liquor laws. Responses to the question of perceptions of stakeholder’s effectiveness,

elicited a range of disparate responses (refer to Table 56). The first key theme to

emerge was identified as ‘relationships with police’ and was reflected in the following

comments: “All partners are good. We have good relationships with other

192

departments” (p1), “have excellent rapport with police” (p1) and “all pretty good …

very important during Ekka week” (p10). There were, however, those participants who

expressed concerns with the relationships, including those with police, such as

“important – but QPS try to get too involved. Like spies to catch you out” (p5), “found

it difficult to get liquor licensing along to Accord meetings … need high level of QPS

and Liquor Licensing staff at some meetings” (p11), “utterly depends on people at QPS

… major changes in QPS – lack of continuity. High staff turnover” (p12), and “Also

scared to put a call into police or ambulance as we are worried about how this

information will be used against us in the future” (p20). The next important theme was,

‘other partnerships exclusive of police’. Again, a range of divergent views were held

regarding the effectiveness of external (exclusive of police) partnerships. Such

comments included “All partners are good. We have good relationships with other

departments” (p1), “Very important. Couldn’t be without them” (p1), “Liquor

licensing needs to be more active in underage drinking. BCC lacking in their

obligations” (p2), “BCC get away with murder … they have put a bus stop right outside

the nightclub as well as a ashtray rubbish bin even though smoking is prohibited” (p2),

“QPS and BCC need to work closer to lobby liquor licensing to ensure that fees from

licenses are being re-introduced into the local area” (p11), “stakeholders have picked

up their act in the past couple of years but previously were not as good as now” (p18),

“too many partners … some give advice then another agency says another thing” (p23),

“BCC decision makers are not attending meetings [VAMP]” (p22) and “Brisbane City

Liquor Accord – they are more of a lobby group” (p25).

The next key theme to emerge related to those barriers termed ‘practical

obstacles’. A range of impediments have been identified by participants, through the

following comments: “resource issues for all partners though” (p1), “hard to open up

clubs and pubs … no clear outline of laws and lots up for interpretation” (p6), “Valley

Liquor Accord – they are the model others should follow … needs to be compulsory”

(p25), “Compliance visits – sometimes 20 people attend. Some things can be done

during daytime. Understand importance of the element of surprise though” (p17),

“We’re scared of compliance checks” (p20) and “Chaplain Watch are often at an

incident such as someone injured or a fight that has erupted before police and QAS”

(p25).

The last major theme that emerged from participant comments was titled

‘political impediments’. Participant comments reflected that there is acrimony in the

193

political interface between management of licensed premises and politicians. This was

highlighted in comments such as “can be political interference at times” (p3), “need

better commitment between partners … all at fault cause we don’t do enough” (p3),

“fall down because of politicians creating legislation which is adverse to partnerships

performing better” (p3), and “the only thing that complicates the relationship [BCC

and QP]) is politicians” (p9).

194

Table 56: Perceived effectiveness of stakeholders

Theme Participant Responses

Relationships with police

“All partners are good. We have good relationships with other

departments” (p1) “Have excellent rapport with police” (p1) “Important

– but QPS try to get too involved. Like spies to catch you out” (p5)

“absolutely vital … QPS is the most important relationship” (p7) “most

important strategic partnership [e.g. BCC and QPS]” (p9) “All pretty

good … very important during Ekka week” (p10) “Found it difficult to

get liquor licensing along to accord meetings … need high level of QPS

and Liquor Licensing staff at some meetings” (p11) “QPS and BCC need

to work closer to lobby liquor licensing to ensure that fees from licenses

are being re-introduced into the local area” (p11) “utterly depends on

people at QPS … major changes in QPS – lack of continuity. High staff

turnover” (p12) “Also scared to put a call into police or ambulance as

we are worried about how this information will be used against us in the

future” (p20).

Other partnerships

exclusive of police

“All partners are good. We have good relationships with other

departments” (p1) “Very important. Couldn’t be without them” (p1)

“Liquor licensing needs to be more active in underage drinking. BCC

lacking in their obligations” (p2) “BCC get away with murder … they

have put a bus stop right outside the nightclub as well as a ashtray

rubbish bin even though smoking is prohibited” (p2) “some more than

others” (p5) “Partners meet their obligations well. Goodwill among all.

Liquor Licensing – good rapport now, but still needs improvement” (p9)

“most important strategic partnership [e.g. BCC and QPS]” (p9) “All

pretty good … very important during Ekka week” (p10) “Found it

difficult to get liquor licensing along to accord meetings … need high

level of QPS and Liquor Licensing staff at some meetings” (p11) “QPS

and BCC need to work closer to lobby liquor licensing to ensure that fees

from licenses are being re-introduced into the local area” (p11) “Very

important. Being able to access information about security providers is

essential for Office of Fair Trading” (p13) “Street level partnerships not

up higher” (p14) “Liquor Licensing are a little tougher than police”

(p18) “Stakeholders have picked up their act in the past couple of years

but previously were not as good as now” (p18) “Some agencies are ad

hoc … things are not thought through well enough” (p20) “Liquor

Licensing is not capable of doing their job” (p20) “Too many partners …

some give advice then another agency says another thing” (p23) “BCC

decision makers are not attending meetings [VAMP]” (p22) “Brisbane

City Liquor Accord – they are more of a lobby group” (p25).

Practical obstacles

“resource issues for all partners though” (p1) “VAMP should be

compulsory … every licensee should be at these meetings and

communicate and get-along” (p3) “On the whole – very good. Accords

and VAMP all well attended” (p22) “Valley Liquor Accord – they are the

model others should follow … needs to be compulsory” (p25) “hard to

open up clubs and pubs … no clear outline of laws and lots up for

interpretation” (p6) “When no clear policy direction, there is no unifying

force to it” (p9) “Do it to the bare minimum of the guidelines required”

(p13) “To varying degrees … it should be about safety” (p14) “Very

important. WHS have a different powers of entry and it complements

other organisations” (p16) “Most licensees will do what they need to do

to provide a safe environment [legal obligations]… it is in their best

interests to do so” (p17) “Compliance visits – sometimes 20 people

attend. Some things can be done during daytime. Understand

importance of the element of surprise though” (p17) “Compliance checks

are typically around 11pm … these pose little problems” (p18) “We’re

scared of compliance checks” (p20) “Chaplain Watch are often at an

incident such as someone injured or a fight that has erupted before police

and QAS” (p25).

195

Table 56: Perceived effectiveness of stakeholders (cont.) Theme Participant Responses

Political impediments “Can be political interference at times” (p3) “Need better commitment

between partners … all at fault cause we don’t do enough” (p3) “fall

down because of politicians creating legislation which is adverse to

partnerships performing better” (p3) “the only thing that complicates the

relationship [BCC and QPS] is politicians” (p9).

p=participant

7.5 Discussion

The aim of this study was to determine the attitude and thoughts of those within

the broader liquor industry (government, non-government and community but exclusive

of police) and their perceptions of the knowledge, skills, attitudes and capacity of police

to reduce alcohol-related harm concerning licensed premises. A rigorous search of the

published literature has not identified any research focused on a comprehensive

qualitative analysis of a broad range of stakeholders, exclusive of police, involved in

management and response to an entertainment precinct anywhere previously. This is

surprising given the significantly growing body of literature on the subject of the

management of licensed premises and issues associated with alcohol-related harm.

In terms of participant awareness of the QPS role, there was a clear

understanding by the majority of participants that the QPS role was to act in ways

consistent with the law and to otherwise engage in a range of enforcement-related

activities. Such activities were seen by participants as falling into two categories. One

such category related to reactive policing, which included activities around responding

to trouble in licensed premises, monitoring crowd controllers and removing trouble

makers. In terms of proactive approaches, participants identified the following

activities as consistent with that approach: early intervention with offenders, support of

licensed premises operators, and high visibility policing. When participants were asked

about their understanding of individual officer roles in the policing of licensed premises

a range of responses were received but the consistent message to emerge was that there

is a difference in the roles of general duty (uniformed) police and specialist (LEAPS

Unit) police, particularly around knowledge, skill and capability.

As has been previously discussed, in the first key theme, participants were

universally of the view that the knowledge, skill and capability of police in specialist

units (LEAPS Unit) was to a higher level than that of general duty police. Participant

196

comments included that these specialist officers were better trained than their colleagues

from generalist areas and were therefore better able to intervene knowledgeably and

authoritatively to deal with problems and issues as they emerged. Participants also

reported that officers working within BCD generally had a positive attitude to their

duties and had important local knowledge that they could use in the resolution of

alcohol-related issues. Participants also commented on the importance of sound and

effective leadership as well as the quality of the leadership in BCD. On both these

measures there were comments from participants who reported positively on the

importance and effectiveness of such leadership in BCD.

Participants identified a range of barriers which serve to restrict or prevent

officers from policing licensed premises. Overwhelmingly, participants reported the

lack of human resources (e.g. police officers) as the key barrier. Other resourcing

limitations such as time, police computer systems and the time to charge offenders were

identified as limitations or barriers. There were participants who identified that there

were barriers in the liquor industry such as ‘dodgy operators’ and negative media

attention that served as limitations. Other constraints to emerge related to government

and policy barriers, which were reflected in comments about the collection by

government of fees from licensees and better ‘powers’ for police to utilise to deal with

offenders. However, there were those participants who reported that the long-term effect

of the Fitzgerald corruption reforms of the late 1980s was a constraining factor, as well

as reflecting the potential for police corruption associated with licensed premises. The

corruption issue reflected the threat of police becoming compromised when they

become inappropriately close to licensed premises operators and others concerned in

their management.

Corruption, particularly relating to police behaviours, can take many forms. The

types and dimensions of police misconduct and/or corruption that may be relevant

within licensed premises and that the participant may have been referring to include

‘corruption of authority’ (e.g. when an officer receives some form of material gain by

virtue of their position as a police officer without violating the law per se – such as

receiving discount drinks when they are off-duty patrons), ‘shakedowns’ (e.g.

acceptance of a bribe for not following through with a criminal violation – not making

an arrest, filing a complaint or impounding property), ‘the fix’ (undermining criminal

investigations or proceedings such as withdrawing or losing a brief to prevent

prosecution), or ‘green lighting’ (police protection of those involved in illegal activities

197

such as drugs, enabling the business to operate) (Committee on the Office of the

Ombudsman and the Police Integrity Commission, 2002). However, what was clearly

implied from conversations with this participant was that through the nature of policing

and the unsupervised discretionary powers of officers, licensed premises environments

are a setting in which officers are faced with temptation and the opportunity for

misconduct. Additionally, it was believed that this participant was referring to the idea

of the ‘slippery-slope’ of police corruption, whereby small acts of misconduct lead to

big acts of corruption (Committee on the Office of the Ombudsman and the Police

Integrity Commission, 2002).

The opportunities and capabilities of officers to exploit effectively partnerships

was a key area of investigation. Not surprisingly, participants had a comprehensive

knowledge of a broad range of stakeholders from a diversity of contexts, influential in

addressing issues in licensed premises. Many participants reported their relationships

with the police and other stakeholders in terms of effective, productive and consistent

with the objects of partnering to reduce alcohol-related harm. There were those

however, who were concerned about their relationship with other stakeholders,

particularly those with a compliance function. Those stakeholders from BCC and

Liquor Licensing were singled out for criticism in terms of their level of engagement

with licensed premises. The resourcing limitations of partners and stakeholders were

raised as an important constraining factor in fulfilling the optimum relationship. Again

political issues were raised in terms of the impact on partnerships, with participants

stating that there was at times political interference and that politicians complicate the

relationships of stakeholders.

There are a number of practical implications of these findings. The most

significant of these relates to the opportunity to enhance partnerships with key

stakeholders in the licensed premises context. This study offers a unique insight into

the views and attitudes of external stakeholders. It explores their attitudes towards

police, what police officers do and the strategies they employ and challenges them to

make an assessment of police effectiveness. The study also explores participants’

attitudes towards partnerships in terms of their effectiveness. In doing so it provides not

only a unique insight but also baseline information from which enhanced partnerships

can occur and be measured against. Importantly, it also creates for operational police

and those at the strategic policy setting level a report card on police performance in this

important area. This then allows operational police to take a more proactive policing

198

posture in terms of partnerships, as well as encouraging senior police to capitalise on

those partnerships which are key in facilitating public safety. It also allows senior

police the opportunity to examine such relationships within an ethical framework. This

is the case given the important comments that external stakeholders made about the

opportunities for corrupt relationships to form between police and licensed premises

operators.

A further practical implication from this study relates to the differentiation made

between generalist and specialist police. Participants were clearly of the view that

specialist police (e.g. LEAPS officers) were better credentialed and skilled in policing

what is a difficult and challenging environment. This was consistent with the attitudes

of senior officers derived from Study Two. The practical implication associated with

this is the enhanced degree of specialisation by increasing the number of LEAPS

officers, or alternatively enhancing the skill levels of general duties officers. In any

event, there are a range of practical and resource impediments associated with this as

discussed in Chapter Six.

As well as the practical implications for these findings there are also theoretical

implications. The Three Circle Public Value Model (Alford, 1995) has been influential

in both framing the research questions, and further, helpful in facilitating the

examination of the research findings. Although the relevance of the model has been

discussed previously, it is important to identify, that in terms of Study Three, external

stakeholders (participants) were able to examine and make comment on all aspects of

the model. This included the degree that senior officers (i.e. the authorising

environment) supported and guided general duty police direction and action at the

licensed premises level. Further, it also provided a vehicle to comment on the degree to

which officers are supplied with the necessary equipment (i.e. operational capability) to

achieve effective outcomes. Lastly, the participants were also given an opportunity to

assess police officer outcomes and outputs (i.e. public value). The questions posed in

the interview schedule were developed having regard for the Three Circle Public Value

Model. As has been indicated previously the various components of the model were

specifically used to inform the interview schedule. Had it not been for the utility of the

model then it is likely that the questions would have been limited merely to the public

value proposition, which is directed merely at officer outputs and perceived outcomes

(e.g. contribution to public safety). This would have significantly limited the research

outcomes.

199

There are significant strengths associated with the study, the most significant of

which is arguably the novel value of the approach. Despite the recent research focus on

licensed premises policing, the author of this program of research is unaware of any

similar research which features the views of external stakeholders and examines these

within the context of police views. A further strength is the choice and theoretical fit of

the chosen model. This model, as has been discussed, has value-added considerably to

this study specifically and to the program of research generally.

It could be construed that there is a potential limitation relevant to this study and

this relates to the seemingly small sample size. The small sample size is also relevant in

terms of validity of the sample given that there are a range of industry and non-

government stakeholders who were not canvassed as to their views. Attempts were

made to address this by expanding the number of invitations to participants and through

using the snowball sampling technique. Despite these factors, those participants who

did contribute do represent a broad cross-section of stakeholder groups and have value-

added to this program of research.

7.6 Summary

This chapter explored the attitudes and perceptions of stakeholders, external to

police and relevant to the policing of licensed premises within BCD. The diversity of

interviewees from a government and non-government (licensed premises, business

community and others) perspective added considerably to an appreciation of the

complexity of policing such problematic contexts. In fact, no examination of the

subject of policing of licensed premises would be comprehensive without an

appreciation of the views and perspectives of key stakeholders, outside of police.

Therefore stakeholder interviews offered a unique insight into the industry and an

external view of the police and policing environment. These interviews elicited a

number of themes or findings which emanate from this study; however, the four key

areas of investigation related to the following areas: (1) QPS role and importantly,

officer role; (2) the knowledge and capability of specialist police compared with general

duties police; (3) the identification of barriers which serve to restrict or prevent police

officers; and (4) the opportunity and capability of police and other stakeholders to

leverage off external partnerships to give effect to a reduction in harms regarding

licensed premises.

200

The next chapter discusses the conclusions and recommendations from this

research. It further discusses limitations of the research and examines further

opportunities for future research in this important area.

201

CHAPTER EIGHT: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

8.1 Introduction …………………………………………………. 202

8.2 Overview of the studies, methodology and key findings …… 203

8.3 Implications for police and the policing of licensed premises 221

8.4 Recommendations to police organisations ………………….. 223

8.5 Contribution to research …………………………………….. 227

8.6 Strengths and limitations of the research …………………… 231

8.7 Suggestions for future research ……………………………... 234

8.8 Conclusion …………………………………………………... 235

202

8.1 Introduction

The primary aim of this program of research was to examine police officer self-

identified knowledge, beliefs, and skill levels, and barriers associated with the policing

of licensed premises. Three studies were conducted to investigate the research aims and

provided a framework for examination of critical issues of relevance from the

perspective of (1) the operational officer at the jurisdictional level (Study One), (2)

senior officers within three key levels of operational and strategic management (e.g.

district, regional and corporate levels) (Study Two), and (3) a diversity of external

stakeholders in a broad range of areas relevant to licensed premises in the study area

(Study Three).

Alcohol is no ordinary commodity (Barbor et al., 2010) and there are various

reasons for this view. The complexity of alcohol-related issues can include the extent

that alcohol is consumed within the community, the settings within which consumption

occurs, and the diversity and nature of the problems associated with misuse of alcohol.

The proportion of police time and resources that are devoted to responding to alcohol-

related incidents makes the case that alcohol is a challenging contextual issue for police,

and further, demonstrates the importance for this research.

This research took a multi-faceted approach. It identified the level of knowledge

of officers regarding policing alcohol and licensed premises and explored the

knowledge of these officers concerning strategies effective in addressing alcohol-related

harm both inside and outside licensed premises. The research explored the extent and

nature of the application of strategies in addressing alcohol-related harms while

examining officer perceptions of the effectiveness of those strategies. Additionally, it

examined the ‘authorising environment’ in terms of rules, regulations, policies and

directives from those that set operational and strategic direction for policing in BCD.

This aspect identified the congruency in strategic priority setting and the articulation of

effort at the operational level. The research also analysed the perspective of external

partners (government, non-government, business and community), in particular their

views on police performance and capability, as well as their potential for stakeholders to

contribute to reducing alcohol-related harm in BCD.

203

8.2 Overview of the studies, methodology and key findings

The methodological approach employed in this research was to undertake studies

to survey three distinct groups, with the view of understanding the motivations and

practice of police officers in the policing of licensed premises and the space adjacent to

such premises.

This research was informed by the Three Circle Public Value Model (Moore,

1995), which recognises that achieving public value is influenced by two key factors. It

is important to note however, that this research did not attempt to test or prove Moore’s

model, but rather used it to guide the research objectives and the analysis of the

findings. The first key factor is the ‘authorising environment’ and the second is

‘operational capability’. Both of these factors were found to be important and necessary

considerations in identifying the optimum role for police in terms of policing licensed

premises. The rationale for this is that police will only be marginally effective if they

do not have a strong authorising environment (e.g. rules, legislation, regulations, policy

or government/departmental mandate) supportive of their activity. Equally, police will

not achieve their optimum level of performance if they do not have a high level of

operational capability (e.g. time, equipment, personnel, fiscal resources). The optimum

role of police in the policing of licensed premises, or ‘public value’, will therefore be

strongly determined by the authorising environment and operational capability. The

Three Circle Public Value Model was therefore useful in providing a framework for the

research and assist in analysing the results, as well as explaining why Study Two

(focusing on senior officers and their mandate) and Study Three (focusing on external

stakeholders) were significant to the overall findings.

In terms of the methodology employed in each study, and particularly relevant to

Study One (examination of issues relating to operational police), the research program

focused predominately on self-reported data provided by police officer participants.

Information was captured largely using quantitative means; however, there was some

opportunity for qualitative responses to a limited number of open-ended questions.

Studies Two (senior police personnel) and Three (external stakeholders) were facilitated

utilising face-to-face interviewing techniques. In both these studies open-ended

questions were used, and ostensibly the same questions were asked of both samples.

The key findings from Study One are presented below and grouped under the

broad themed areas as follows: (1) officer beliefs relevant to licensed premises (Section

204

8.2.1); (2) officer practice inside and outside licensed premises (Section 8.2.2); officer

knowledge, skill levels, capability and implications for policing activities in and around

licensed premises (Section 8.2.3); factors identified as barriers to policing licensed

premises (Section 8.2.4); and, factors predictive of police entering licensed premises

(Section 8.2.5).

8.2.1 Beliefs relevant to licensed premises

In policing terms, the BCD area is unique and defined by its licensed premises

environment (e.g. the number of licensed premises and their proximity to each other),

social characteristics (e.g. the extent of human interaction and extent of alcohol

consumption and violent/antisocial behaviour), and policing intervention strategies (e.g.

high visibility and public order policing).

A number of research initiatives have historically attempted to identify the

quantum of incidents that officers attend that are alcohol-related, and such approaches

(e.g. Arro et al., 1992; Ireland & Thommeny, 1993; Jeffs & Saunders, 1983) have

utilised officer engagement through activity log methods. This research addressed a

similar research objective; however, it did so through participant responses (both

quantitative and qualitative) as opposed to the activity log method. The result was that

participants reported a significant link between incidents that they responded to and

alcohol, which is a finding similar to that of studies that used the aforementioned

activity log method. Approximately three-quarters (75.5%) of participants reported that

over 50% of all incidents officers responded to were alcohol-related. The results accord

with other research findings (Arro et al., 1992; Davey & French, 1995; Ireland &

Thommeny, 1993; Palk et al., 2007b), which were obtained using different

methodology. These previous studies also identified a high correlation between

offending and alcohol.

Officers also reported high levels of alcohol consumption involvement in many

instances, commonly associated with alcohol usage, such as disturbances in licensed

premises, street disturbances and assaults. This is also consistent with the findings of

previous research (Findlay et al., 1999). Interestingly, officers also found that those

incidents strongly associated with alcohol consumption were the most difficult and

complex matters to resolve (i.e. disturbance in licensed premises, street disturbance and

assault). It is not surprising that officers identified that alcohol adds significantly to the

205

complexity in dealing with matters. It is thought that responding to incidents involving

intoxicated people prevents officers from utilising effectively, that which is referred to

in Service policy and training as ‘use of force’ options such as tactical communication,

and prevents the full suite of problem solving strategies being employed.

This research also examined officer perceptions of complexity and difficulty in

responding to a range of settings. The results identified that those premises strongly

associated with alcohol sale and supply were also identified as being the most

problematic to respond to. Such premises (in order of complexity and difficulty)

include inside licensed nightclubs, inside licensed clubs and inside hotels. Importantly,

responding to incidents inside licensed premises was seen as more complex and difficult

than responding to situations outside licensed premises or in other settings such as

major public entertainment venues or private dwellings. Other research initiatives have

identified similar findings (Findlay et al., 1999), citing a range of issues, such as officer

safety, as being strong factors in this regard. Participants have strongly indicated that

they shun ‘turning a blind eye’ to issues of aggression or antisocial alcohol-related type

behaviours. Instead, their preferred strategy in such situations in preference to arrest, is

to employ diversion, such as relinquishing an intoxicated person into the care of family

and friends and established non-government diversion centres. Arrest is evidently used

as a last resort in cases where, because of extreme levels of intoxication and aggression,

diversion is not appropriate.

Other research has identified that police officers do not like policing licensed

premises and there are a range of reasons which have been advanced for this (Doherty

& Roche, 2003; Findlay et al., 1999). This research is strongly suggestive that the

complexity and difficulty in dealing with issues and the nature of the licensed premises

contributes to officer beliefs that they do not like policing alcohol-related incidents,

particularly in licensed premises. The issues previously identified relating to alcohol

involvement, officer perception of premises being correlated with violence and

aggression, and officer preferences concerning courses of action, have significant

implications for police. Such implications can include strategic and operational policy

setting, meaning the organisation’s attitude to supporting particular types of policing of

licensed premises. This also has implications for education and training approaches.

Police practice is becoming increasingly more complex and this has been

attributed to the demands for more proactive approaches to the enforcement of laws and

the reduction of crime (Arnold & Laidler, 1994; Ireland, 1993; Rydon, 1994; K. L.

206

Smith et al., 2001). Other than exploring the types of incidents and the premises in

which these incidents occur, participants were also asked to what degree a range of

factors contribute to the complexity and difficulty in managing alcohol-related

incidents. The results identified that situations in which one or more people involved

are aggressive was the most significant factor adding to officer difficulties in dealing

with incidents. Other such factors adding to the difficulty were when spectators are

affected by alcohol and when people involved are mentally ill. This research has also

identified that disturbances within licensed premises (particularly night clubs) where

aggression is involved are the most difficult and complex type of intervention

undertaken by police. These results are important in understanding the factors that add

to the challenges and difficulty in police officer responses. A significant focus of this

research is not only what officers do in terms of licensed premises but also the factors

that act as barriers and serve to limit their ability to engage; this will be dealt with in

more detail later in the chapter.

Police officers rely upon the authority of a diverse array of legislative provisions

to give effect to their role. The Liquor Act is but one of these and there are competing

interests in terms of giving sufficient time to educating police on the contents of the

Act, compared with the vast array of other relevant legislative authorities. Previous

research has indicated that the provisions of licensing legislation are often complex and

something best understood and applied by specialist police (Doherty & Roche, 2003; K.

L. Smith et al., 2001). The pressure on officers to have a working knowledge of other

legislative regimes means that the Liquor Act, which is most probably utilised to a

lesser degree than other legislation, is arguably not given prominence. The results of

this research indicate low levels of knowledge of the Act, which supports this

hypothesis.

From a regulatory perspective the Liquor Act in the Queensland context also

places obligations not only on police but also on OLGR as well. Of relevance to this

research are the beliefs that officers have in terms of who should have responsibility for

giving effect to the Liquor Act. Overwhelmingly (90%) participants indicated that this

should be a shared responsibility. It appears that officers see themselves as being part

of the solution to the alcohol problem, but not solely custodians of the problems or the

solutions to such problems. The effect of this is to be supportive of, at least at the

theoretical level of partnerships, harm reduction and enforcement at the premises level.

Officers identified that the partnerships were generally effective and that the police and

207

OLGR partnership was particularly strong. Interestingly, participants were of the view

that the security providers (licensed security providers and agents) performed to a more

efficient level than did other government stakeholders such as QFRA, BCC or

Queensland Health. It is likely that participant comments reflect the extent of

engagement, noting that there is numerically more contact with security providers than

with some of the government stakeholders. A further potential reason for such a view is

that police and security providers directly engage many times a night to suppress violent

exchanges among patrons which, it can be argued, forges closer bonds and leads to a

perception of a collaborative partnership.

8.2.2 Practice inside and outside licensed premises

Officers surveyed as part of Study One indicated high levels of engagement or

interaction both inside and outside licensed premises. Police intervention outside

licensed premises was more frequent than inside. This is possibly due to the extent of

the presence of private security providers, who are the primary response agents in

licensed premises, as opposed to outside such premises, where responses are routinely

police matters. Proportionally, junior officers responded to the majority of matters and

this is likely due to two reasons. First, junior officers (Constables/Senior Constables)

comprise 75.6% of the sample, and 52% of the sample reported less than eight years

police service. Second, Constables/Senior Constables are more likely to be first

responders as opposed to other less operationally focused roles, such as supervisory

officers or management roles (e.g. Sergeants/Senior Sergeants or commissioned

officers). Because there are significantly more male officers than female both working

in BCD and participating in the survey, male officers were more likely to respond to

incidents in licensed premises compared to females. Rank and gender are important

considerations in this area, given that previous research has identified these factors are

correlated with knowledge and skills (K. L. Smith et al., 2001). This will be discussed

later in the comparisons of officer skill levels.

When police respond to an incident, either inside or outside licensed premises, it

is likely that they respond based either on their own initiative (self-initiation), or

alternatively, by other means (external initiation). Self-initiation involvement can occur

when officers witness an incident amounting to an offence or breach of the peace as

distinct from external initiation, which can occur when directed to attend by senior

208

officers or police radio calls. The results confirm that there are a greater proportion of

matters concerning licensed premises which are initiated by ‘other means’ (e.g. external

initiation). While this could be construed as reluctance on the part of officers to be

involved of their own volition, it is equally open to argument that the environment and

police structure can account for this situation. The number of licensed premises and the

scale of policing operations, combined with the various sources of

intelligence/information that police rely upon, all make for the situation where events

are unlikely to occur, at least at the same rate as other ‘non-witnessed’ matters.

Therefore, it is more likely that officers will receive a report of a matter requiring

intervention than actually witnessing such an incident. This is also consistent with

Routine Activity Theory which supports the notion that crime is more likely to occur

when a number of situations are present such as the absence of capable guardians, such

as police officers, that could intervene. Interestingly, as officers progress in years of

service (i.e. on-the-job experience) they are less likely to initiate by ‘other means’. This

means that more experienced officers are more likely to act of their own volition, which

is in contrast to situations which are reported to them necessitating action, or where they

are directed to respond. The situation presented from the research findings is one where

senior and more experienced officers are either acting of their own volition to matters

witnessed, or alternatively, are instructing and directing less experienced officers to

intervene in the licensed premise context. Since this research has identified that

experience is correlated with self-initiation, this makes the case for higher levels of

expertise to counter the effects of low levels of experience, in terms of years of service.

There is evidence that the enforcement of liquor licensing laws against licensed

premises is effective in reducing alcohol-related harm associated with such venues

(Findlay et al., 2002; Hauritz et al., 1998; McKnight & Streff, 1996; Toomey, Jones-

Webb, & Wagenaar, 1993). However, such enforcement is not usually undertaken

(Findlay et al., 2002; Single, 1998; Toomey et al., 1993). Consistent with previous

research (Appleby, 2000; Findlay et al., 2002; Homel & Tomsen, 1991; Wagenaar &

Wolfson 1995; Willner et al., 2000), the results of this research indicate that police are

significantly more likely to direct their enforcement action at individual drinkers rather

than at the venue manager, owner or agent supplying the alcohol. There are perhaps a

range of reasons for this; however, lack of knowledge of the Liquor Act (Findlay et al.,

2002) and equally, lack of experience in prosecuting higher order breaches of the said

Act, are hypothesised as the primary reasons for this.

209

The research findings have identified that not only is there a high degree of

involvement by police both inside and outside licensed premises in terms of general

policing, but officers also, to varying degrees, engage in activities which are specific

liquor operations. Such operations are primarily targeted at ensuring compliance by

licensed premises operators to the Liquor Act provisions, and routinely involve inter-

sectoral collaboration with other government stakeholders (e.g. OLGR, BCC, QAS,

QFRA). Slightly less than half of the officers surveyed indicated that in the previous

six months they had been involved in such operations. Given the specialised level of

knowledge required in such operations, LEAPS Unit officers were primarily engaged in

such pursuits, and other specialist officers in public order policing, such as TCS and

CDSU, were more engaged than general duties officers. Liquor operations involving

police and other government stakeholders, as mentioned previously, are supported in the

literature (Doherty & Roche, 2003). Such support is derived from criminological theory

(e.g. Third Party Policing), where the legal levers from relevant enforcement entities

are leveraged off to give effect to harm reduction (Mazerolle & Ransley, 2005). A

further form of support comes from the literature around licensed premises whereby

regulatory approaches are highly efficacious in reducing alcohol-related harm and in

encouraging compliance with the responsible service of alcohol provisions of the Liquor

Act (Doherty & Roche, 2003; Hauritz et al., 1998; McKnight & Streff, 1996; Toomey et

al., 1993).

Police officers have a high degree of flexibility and autonomy to be able to take a

range of actions or employ a variety of styles of policing to address individual breaches

of the law. As has already been discussed, police are significantly more likely to

prosecute the drinker than the venue that supplied the alcohol (Doherty & Roche, 2003;

Findlay et al. 2002; Hauritz et al., 1998; McKnight & Streff, 1996; Toomey et al.,

1993). The research identified that police are likely to take action when they are alerted

to or observe a legal infraction. However, the action that they take is more likely to be

informal or involve less formal remedies in preference to arrest. Favoured strategies

include (in order of preference) tipping alcohol out, taking the person to a place of

safety, taking a person home, or releasing a person into the care of their family or

friends. There could be many reasons for this, but it is likely that, given the number of

people in the entertainment precinct, particularly on a Friday and Saturday night, and

the potential number of infractions of the law, police realise that informal approaches

are the most ethical, consistent and less resource intensive approaches to employ. A

210

further consideration is related to officer safety. If officers were to strictly observe the

law and use arrest as a primary response, they would potentially take arresting officers

away from the area in order to process offenders, thereby diminishing the safety of the

officers that were left to give effect to public safety. It was identified in barriers to

policing licensed premises identified a significant concern for officer safety and

therefore it is likely that safety is a consideration in officer response styles at licensed

premises.

8.2.3 Knowledge, skill levels, capability and implications for policing activities

The literature argues that a key determinant of officer success in the proactive

approach to policing licensed premises is, amongst other things, officer knowledge

(Barton & Evans, 1999; K. L. Smith et al., 2001). In the current study a significant

number of officers self-identified as having either low or no knowledge of the strategies

which were effective in policing licensed premises. This was the case in terms of

strategies both inside and outside licensed premises, although knowledge of effective

strategies outside licensed premises was rated at higher levels. Low levels of officer

knowledge in this aspect of policing were also identified in another study (K. L. Smith

et al., 2001). Rank was strongly associated with knowledge, with more

Sergeants/Senior Sergeants having higher levels of knowledge than junior officers

(Constables/Senior Constables). Commissioned Officers had higher knowledge than

lower rank groups. K. L. Smith et al. (2001) also found that lower ranked police were

more likely to report being unsure of the responsible service of alcohol provisions of the

Liquor Act. Rolfe (1995) found that experienced officers made more efficient and

timely decisions that did the less experienced officers because less experienced officers

not able to ‘read the cues’ or manage information as well as their more experienced

colleagues. Compared with experienced officers, those with less experience did not

have the reservoir of knowledge or understanding necessary to make sound decisions.

Rolfe (1995) helpfully suggests that inexperienced officers, “generally waste time and

effort examining as much information as possible when much of that information is

relatively unimportant”.

A previous study identified that officers believed that monitoring and enforcing

responsible service provisions was best undertaken by specialist police (K. L. Smith et

al., 2001). Although the K. L. Smith et al. (2001) study did not explore the reasons why

211

officers held such views, the research did identify that lack of officer skill and

resourcing were relevant factors. This led K. L. Smith et al. (2001) to recommend that

“further research of police attitudes in this regard appears warranted”. In the current

study, higher levels of knowledge was also exhibited within specialist officers such as

those working in LEAPS Unit roles. Generally the lack of knowledge is surprising

given that so much of officer time in the survey area is devoted to dealing with alcohol-

related issues pertaining to licensed premises. There could be a number of explanations

for this but it is possible and highly likely that officers may not associate particular

activities that they undertake with those that are both effective and aim to address

alcohol-related harm. As an example, officers reported that “taking an alcohol affected

person to a place of safety” was a strategy they utilised frequently. However, very few

participants recorded this, in a qualitative sense, as an effective strategy. In terms of

qualitative responses to the question of knowledge of effective strategies, the most

frequent response (27.1%) identified was “walk throughs of licensed premises”

followed by “ensuring responsible service of alcohol”. These responses are consistent

with the findings of other research (Jeffs & Saunders, 1983).

In the only other relevant comprehensive Australian study to examine officer

knowledge of the Liquor Act (Findlay et al., 2002), it was found that officers who

claimed to have very good knowledge of the liquor laws were most likely to enforce

vendor or licensee breaches of the liquor laws. With regard to knowledge levels, the

majority of officers reported that they had reasonably low levels of knowledge of the

Liquor Act. Around one-third of participants reported having either good or very good

levels of knowledge. This is a common issue identified in the literature, where it also

has been found that officer knowledge of the relevant Liquor Act provisions was at low

levels (Doherty & Roche, 2003). There are perhaps a number of reasons for this, such

as lack of organisational priority for training, training agendas already at capacity (King

et al., 1997), resourcing issues (Ayling, Grabosky, & Shearing, 2009; K. L. Smith et al.,

2001), and the ‘knowledge competition’ of a broad range of other statutes that police are

responsible for. Since officer knowledge, particularly of the Liquor Act, is a precursor

to taking action against licensed premises, this is arguably a significant opportunity for

the QPS to address low levels of enforcement.

Not only has the research examined the issue of levels or extent of officer

knowledge, but the research also has investigated the sources of acquisition of that

knowledge. Previous research has reported that the majority of police believe that they

212

are adequately trained to carry out their duties (Middleton, 1992; MRL Research Group,

1993; K. L. Smith, et al., 2001). It is assumed that officers obtain their knowledge from

formal education and training (e.g. pre-Service and in-Service training programs) as

well as informal sources (e.g. supervisors, mentoring, colleagues and other non-police

stakeholders). Officers reported, with respect to the acquisition of knowledge relating

to policing inside licensed premises, that formal training (such as liquor courses) was

most strongly influential, followed by experience (such as on-the-job experience). In

terms of policng outside licensed premises, training again featured as the primary source

of knowledge, followed by experience.

The current research findings are important for senior and influential officers at

the strategic and policy setting levels, as well as officers involved in setting curriculum

priorities. The implications for the QPS are that formal training is important in terms of

acquisition of knowledge. However, a notable opportunity exists for police to capitalise

on the informal sources of knowledge and skill acquisition. Participants reported that

their colleagues, other non-police stakeholders and their experience were all influential

in shaping their knowledge, which means that informal learning and officer experience

were highly influential correlates in knowledge acquisition.

In one other relevant study (K. L. Smith et al., 2001), the results identified that it

was the perception by a large number of police surveyed that they had a lack of skill to

enforce the responsible service of alcohol provisions of the Liquor Act. In the current

study, skill levels were examined and revealed that over 88% of officers to police inside

licensed premises, compared with 95% of officers reporting good or very good skill

levels to police outside premises. It was identified that Sergeants and Senior Sergeants

were more likely to report a higher level of skill to police inside licensed premises.

However, with respect to outside such premises, rank was not correlated with skill

levels. K. L. Smith et al’s (2001) research reported that lower ranked officers were

more likely to report being unsure of the responsible service provisions of the Liquor

Act, which may explain the minor differences between the perceived skill levels to

police inside versus outside licensed premises in the current program of research.

8.2.4 Identified barriers to policing

The available literature identifies a potential range of issues that serve to act as

barriers to police engaging in licensed premises. These issues include lack of officer

213

knowledge and skill, officers not appreciating the potential benefits of liquor policing,

lack of time and task prioritisation, adequately trained police, and other resource

constraints (K. L. Smith et al., 2001). If police are to seize opportunities to improve or

enhance their performance in the policing of licensed premises then there needs to be a

consideration of those factors which serve to restrict or constrain police from such

engagement. An important focus of this research was centred on this very issue.

Officers reported that the most constraining factors or barriers that negatively impacted

on their ability to police either inside or outside licensed premises were (in order) time,

safety for police, and police support. When officers report that time is the most

significant factor, this is likely to be an acknowledgment of the competing demands

upon an officer. It is also most likely to be associated with an affirmation that policing

licensed premises is an activity that occurs, in many cases, where time allows. This

could further mean that such policing is lower priority than other competing activities.

The second most significant barrier, safety for police, highlights two factors. The first

factor is that licensed premises are environments which are perceived to be ‘unsafe’ and

more dangerous that other settings. The second factor is the importance that officers

place on their personal safety as a priority. This view, relating to safety of such

premises, is also correlated with officer beliefs that premises are strongly correlated

with difficulty in police response.

The least likely factors to act as impediments were (in order of least impaction)

knowledge of effective policing strategies and an individual’s knowledge of policy.

The available literature (Doherty & Roche, 2003; K. L. Smith et al., 2001) identifies

that officers have a potentially limited knowledge of the relevant Liquor Act; however,

knowledge of policy, relevant to liquor policing, has not before been canvassed in any

known research. Given that police powers provide significant authority for them to

engage in certain (lawful) actions, the absence of sufficient powers could significantly

curtail or impede police activity. The officers consistently identified reasonably high

levels of knowledge of police powers, as well as their views about adequacy of those

powers in guiding lawful police actions. The results also indicated that officers have

greater reported levels of satisfaction with their police powers relevant to policing

outside licensed premises than inside such premises.

214

8.2.5 Factors predictive of entering licensed premises.

In understanding the motivations of officers to police licensed premises it is also

important to identify those factors which are strongly associated with or predicative of

officers entering such premises. By understanding these factors senior officers can

theoretically manipulate factors to encourage more police activity in the licensed

premises environment. Therefore, a logistic regression analysis was conducted to

investigate the predictive role of a range of variables (e.g. job title, reason for initiation,

skills, knowledge of strategies and training) with the outcome variable of frequency of

entering licensed premises in the last six months. Overall, a number of variables were

predictive of the dependent variable. First, an increased frequency of both self-initiating

as well as being directed by others to enter licensed premises was predictive of such

policing activities. Second, reporting higher levels of perceived skills to effectively

manage an incident inside licensed premises was also predictive of engagement in a

higher frequency of such behaviour. Finally, participants’ perceived level of training to

respond to such incidents was also predictive, although it is noted that this variable was

a combined item and included perceived levels of training to respond to incidents both

inside and outside licensed premises.

Identifying the predictive factors for entering licensed premises is an important

consideration for strategic leadership within the QPS. This research suggests that in

order for officers to undertake more policing of licensed premises they have to be

comfortable about entering such premises, and the more that they initiate and engage

with licensed premises then the more likely they are to undertake such activity in the

future. For police strategic leaders, offering targeted and highly relevant skill training

and thereby enhancing officer perceived skill levels is also likely to return a dividend by

encouraging officers to engage in licensed premises. This holds significant

opportunities for contemporary police leaders and provides a clear recommendation

within this research.

8.2.6 Study Two – Senior officer attitudes and beliefs

One of the innovative aspects of this research is the examination of the attitude of

senior police towards police knowledge, skills, attitudes and capacity to reduce alcohol-

related harm both inside and outside licensed premises. No other research on the

subject of policing licensed premises has been identified which addresses the attitude of

215

senior officers at the strategic and policy setting levels of the organisation. As has been

outlined previously, Moore’s Public Value Model, which highlights the importance of

the authorising environment (in this case senior officers), is crucial in terms of creating

public value, such as public safety.

This research suggests that for public value to be enhanced, there needs to be a

consistent and unambiguous shared vision between officers at the operational level with

those who are the authorising environment (e.g. senior officers). This hypothesis has

been supported by the results of Study Two, given that senior officers identify that the

role of officers engaged in policing licensed premises is focused on ‘public safety’.

Interestingly, officers identified that this is achieved through proactive and reactive

means, which again is consistent with the views expressed by operational officers (e.g.

those in Study One). There was congruence between operational officers and senior

officers on the issue of their understanding of their role. Senior officers stated

unequivocally that they believed that officers had clarity as to their role; this was

particularly true of specialist liquor (LEAPS) officers. Given the role of specialist

police and the nature of their daily work, which is focused on licensed premises and

alcohol-related harm, it is thought that senior officers are of the view that such officers

have greater role clarity. Interestingly, this is also a universally held assumption,

common to all three studies and will be discussed within the interpretation of Study

Three findings.

Senior officers were asked to for their views on the Queensland Government and

QPS expectations of officers. It was thought by the author that the issue of ‘public

safety’ would emerge as the predominant theme. What actually emerged however, was

that senior officers identified that government was looking for balance. The Liquor Act

1992 (Qld) identifies that the objects of that Act are to ensure personal safety (harm

minimisation) as well as the economic prosperity of the liquor industry. Although these

officers, in their responses, did not specifically refer to the competing legislative

priorities of the legislation, the author has interpreted that the participants’ comments do

refer indirectly to that issue. It was clear that public safety was the predominant factor.

However, participant responses did identify that the liquor industry were powerful and

their issues were a priority for government given issues of revenue generation. The

tension that exists between these two objects is also something that has been indentified

in other research (Findlay et al., 2002).

216

In terms of the QPS expectation of officers, senior officers reported two main

issues. The first related to the way in which officers respond (e.g. response style) and

the second related to their role (e.g. general duties or specialist). In terms of response

style, senior officers have referred to two dimensions: proactivity and reactivity.

Interestingly though, junior officers have given greater focus on reactive approaches to

licensed premises while senior officers have emphasised proactive more than reactive

responses.

The senior officers were given the opportunity to discuss their personal vision

concerning policing of licensed premises. Despite this, many of the comments made

were more focused on the personal vision of the participant concerning alcohol-related

harm, as the comments were not unique to licensed premises. The comments were

themed around three key areas: aspirational vision, outcome vision and pragmatic

vision. What is interesting though is the degree of optimism that emerged, which was

surprising given that alcohol issues are culturally enmeshed with Australian society

(Palk, 2008), and given the amount of alcohol that is consumed, and the number of

police responses which are alcohol-related.

The senior officer participants were canvassed as to their views on the extent to

which they believed that police officers are equipped with the requisite knowledge,

skills and attitudes to effectively undertake their policing of licensed premises. The

literature indicates that the police curriculum has significant competing challenges (K.

L. Smith et al., 2001) and police budgets are equally challenging (K. L. Smith et al.,

2001). Therefore there are significant opportunity costs associated with training. It was

thought, based on previous studies (Doherty & Roche, 2003; K. L. Smith et al., 2001)

that senior officers would hold the view that specialist officers had very sound

knowledge and generalist police to a lesser degree. What emerged was interesting in

that participants reported that pre-Service training at the QPS Academy was to a very

high standard. However, there were significant opportunities at in-Service training that

were not being realised to their full potential. This has significant implications for

future police training, and the resourcing implications associated with this are further

challenges. The senior officers did confirm that their views were supportive of the

hypothesis that specialist officers had high levels of knowledge and that generalists

were skilled, but to a lesser degree than their specialist colleagues. A common sub-

theme to emerge was that participants identified that with police in BCD, given the

nature of their on-ground experience, they were more credentialed and skilled than other

217

generalist officers operating in other areas of Queensland. The reasons for this were not

outlined by participants and this would be a useful area of future scrutiny. It is likely

however, that the extent of alcohol involvement and the unique nature of BCD (high

proportion of licensed premises within a small geographical area) accounts for this

view.

The senior officer participants also held the view that officers operating within

BCD had significant capacity to impact positively on harm reduction with regard to

licensed premises. They did, however, identify a range of barriers that threaten police

reaching their optimum capability in this area. The literature has historically identified

a range of areas as being theoretical barriers to police. These include, but are not

limited to, lack of appropriate training and policy (Findlay et al., 2002), lack of

specialist police, and lack of knowledge and skill of generalist police (K. L. Smith et al.,

2001). It was thought that in this unique area (BCD), officer safety and competing

interests (e.g. many issues to respond to and limited resources) would be amongst the

most significant issues. Indeed, police resourcing was identified by senior officers as a

significant barrier. Officers identified limited police resources and time, competing

calls for service, and the ratio of police to patrons as being the most critical barriers they

encountered. Societal barriers were also identified as an issue, given that participants

held the view that alcohol was seen by the community as very socially acceptable.

Interestingly and quite surprisingly, senior officers reported government and

policy barriers, stating that the Service doesn’t ‘own’ the liquor legislation and further,

that the government does not wish police to be inside licensed premises. This comment

has two elements. First, the very legislative provisions (Liquor Act) that the police

enforce are actually the responsibility of another government entity, and clearly issues

of ownership, expectation and role are implicit in these comments. The second issue

relates to an earlier comment about the government’s expectations or vision. Comments

such as “the government doesn’t want police in licensed premises” infers that

government really are more concerned with the profitability of the liquor industry than

they are with harm minimisation. It is also open to interpretation that the comment may

be inferring that government want licensed premises operators to take responsibility for

the ‘policing’ of their own premises (e.g. self-regulation) as opposed to police, who

maintain good order outside premises.

Through qualitative questioning, senior officers were asked to identify the

appropriate strategies that officers should use to address harms concerning licensed

218

premises. The literature often refers to effective partnerships and high visibility

policing (e.g. Doherty & Roche, 2003). However, other styles of policing and strategies

often are not articulated clearly nor are they the subject of significant empirical research

initiatives. In this case, the senior officers reported that intuitive effective policing

which is consistent with tolerance, discretion, early intervention and high visibility,

were extremely effective. This is also supported by the historical work of Jeffs and

Saunders (1983), who referred to the Torquay Experiment as having qualities associated

with the aforementioned, and this is particularly so with respect to high visibility

policing in licensed premises. During the current research, senior officers referred to

the utility and effectiveness of partnerships particularly in the ability to leverage off the

resources, not only practical ones but also legislative capability to encourage best

practice and harm reduction. This is consistent with the objects of third party policing

(Mazerolle & Ransley, 2005), where the legal levers of relevant government

stakeholders are able to be used for mutually beneficial outcomes.

8.2.7 Study Three – External stakeholder’s attitudes of police role and performance

A further dimension that makes this research novel is the investigation of the

views of external stakeholders relating to the policing of licensed premises. Study

Three has examined the attitude of external stakeholders concerning police knowledge,

skills, attitudes and capacity to reduce alcohol-related harm both inside and outside

licensed premises. No other research on the subject of policing licensed premises has

been identified which addresses the views of external stakeholders and analyses and

contrasts this to the views held by senior police and officers at the operational level.

External stakeholders were questioned as to their understanding of the QPS role

in the policing of licensed premises. The strongest theme to emerge centred on

enforcing laws and enforcement generally, although other themes such as proactive and

reactive approaches to policing did emerge. Although it could be foreseeable that

stakeholders would identify law enforcement and reactive approaches, it was somewhat

unexpected that proactive approaches by officers were also identified. It could be

argued that proactive policing is not always clearly identified, particularly by non-police

personnel, and that reactive pursuits are likely to have greater visibility. Perhaps one

explanation as to external stakeholders identifying the proactive role of police is the

219

extent of community policing, third party policing and problem-solving partnerships

that occur within BCD.

In terms of external stakeholder understanding of individual officer roles within

BCD, one key theme emerged. This related to a comparison between the role of

specialist police and generalist police. Stakeholder responses were strongly of the view

that although generalist police did have an understanding of their role as it related to

alcohol enforcement, specialist police and senior officers had a much higher level of

understanding. This is also consistent with previous research (Doherty & Roche, 2003)

and the views expressed by senior officers in Study Two. In relation to stakeholder

understanding of the Queensland Government expectation of officers, a major theme to

emerge was the negative views of the government’s expectation. There were a diversity

of responses recorded against this theme and some of the issues raised were wastage of

resources, government policy regarding the saving of government resources and

defraying costs to licensed premises, and lack of police powers,. External stakeholders

were also asked their understanding of the QPS expectation of its officers. Important

key concepts to emerge were that of tolerance and discretion, and compliance with

legislation. Again, a further theme related to early intervention and proactivity, which

when taken with comments relating to tolerance and discretion, created the perception

amongst external stakeholders of an organisation which was wanting to take an even-

handed, low key and thoughtful, and evidence-based approach to the problems of

alcohol and licensed premises.

External stakeholders expressed their personal vision in a number of ways. One

theme emerged relating to police capability and relationships, in which participants

were strongly supportive of partnerships in dealing with alcohol issues. This is also

reflected in the literature on Third Party Policing (Mazerolle & Ransley, 2005) and

empirical research findings (Doherty & Roche, 2003). A further key theme to emerge

from participant responses related to patron responsibility, in which it was argued that

there was a need and desire on the part of licensees and their managers to encourage

patrons to take more and better responsibility for their individual actions. The relevant

legislation (Liquor Act) and other ancillary legislation places responsibilities on

individuals to conform to social norms; however, as alluded to by external participants,

licensed premises operators and their agents are subject to significant legislative

constraints in the way in which such premises conduct trade. It is thought that the

participants were making the comment that the balance between individual

220

responsibility versus commercial responsibility was out of kilter, tending too much in

the direction of the commercial, and that the pendulum needs to swing back

significantly. Published research (Appleby, 2000; Homel & Tomsen, 1991; K. L. Smith

et al., 2001; Wagenaar & Wolfson, 1995; Willner & Hart, 2001) argues that police

action, in terms of prosecution, is more likely to be focused upon the prosecution of

individuals than the purveyor of the alcohol or the owner/operator of the premises.

A major area of investigation in this research is the level of officer knowledge,

skills and attitude to successfully effect the policing of licensed premises. When

external stakeholders were asked to articulate their views on such matters, a number of

key themes emerged. One was that there was a distinct difference in the perceived

capability and skill level of officers who were general duty as opposed to those who

were specialist officers. Clearly the strong contention was that specialist officers had

greatly enhanced capability in this regard. This is also consistent with Study One,

which dealt with self-identified levels of knowledge, skill and capability of officers, as

well as Study Two, in which senior officers had the same perception. The literature also

makes the case for specialist officers having increased knowledge, skill and capability

to positively influence harm minimisation within the licensed premises environment

(Doherty & Roche, 2003; K. L. Smith et al., 2001). Briefly two other relevant themes

emerged: the importance of experience and local knowledge in terms of capability, and

the importance of effective leadership in modelling professional behaviour. When taken

together the comments of external participants are strongly suggestive that knowledge

and skills were greater in specialist officers and in officers who had significant

experience, and contextually where leadership was supportive and productive.

This research has also sought to identify the barriers which prevent officers from

reaching their capability in policing licensed premises and has done so through the

examination of the three studies. For external stakeholders, the significant theme that

emerged related to a lack of police human resources. Almost exclusively the view

expressed by stakeholders is that police lack numbers to enhance public safety in BCD.

Other police resourcing limitations were clearly identified as a significant factor and

included time, police training, competing interests (e.g. opportunity costs), and

opportunities for corruption. Resourcing has been a consistent theme, constraining the

effective policing of licensed premises, and also has been identified in the literature.

Previous studies identified resourcing as a significant constraining factor in preventing

police realising their capability in this important domain (K. L. Smith et al., 2001).

221

The literature is often silent on the most effective and/or definitive style of

policing to employ in the policing of licensed premises. When external participants

were asked to identify the strategies that officers should employ, two main themes

emerged: intuitive, effective policing, and partnerships. However, when empirical

research indicates a style, such as the high visibility style of policing referred to in the

Torquay Experiment (Jeffs & Saunders, 1983), the results are uncertain and equivocal,

implying success but not able to be proved in absolute terms. It is also noted that this

study is now considerably dated.

All three studies have identified the utility of partnerships. The literature is also

strongly supportive of Third Party Policing (Mazerolle & Ransley, 2005) and in

particular partnerships between police, government and non-government stakeholders in

the licensed premises environment. Accords and other voluntary agreements and

associations have previously been connected with information sharing and rapport

building, leading to greater evidence-based policing. Overall external stakeholder

participants reported that relationships with police were important and valuable, and that

the current relationships are generally effective. The participants also commented on

partnerships with other stakeholders (exclusive of police), again indicating that

partnerships are theoretically effective but that the effectiveness of such partnerships is

largely dependent on the particular stakeholder, as some agencies were more productive

than others. This is something that poses a significant opportunity for improvement for

all stakeholders.

8.3 Implications for police and the policing of licensed premises

This research has significant implications for individual police officers as well as

police organisations in Australia. As a useful categorisation, such opportunities will be

discussed within the context of policy, practice, partnerships, and performance.

In terms of policy, there is limited existing research regarding police officer

knowledge relevant to liquor licensing legislation and strategies that are effective in

addressing alcohol-related harm. This research serves as a significant source of base-

line data from which police policy makers and educators can revaluate pre-service and

in-service training courses. A further dimension is the ability of police agencies to use

the research to consider the appropriate balance between generalist police and specialist

police to ensure that the balance is right, and consistent with achieving not only efficient

222

and effective outcomes, but also ones consistent with harm minimisation. From a

policy perspective, it is important also for government and senior officers to consider

the importance they place on the policing of licensed premises. This research has

identified, through the application of the theoretical model, the importance of

operational officers being given clear policy direction. A significant opportunity exists

to provide that clarity. Internal QPS policy for enhancing the ability of officers, by

increasing their knowledge and skill, to police licensed premises is also a key

opportunity. Clarity from police agencies as to the division of labour between general

duties police and specialist officers is also an important consideration that should be the

subject of clear policy determinations.

In terms of practice, the research has identified a range of police styles and

strategies, which are regarded as efficient and efficacious. Although there is much

written on the subject of policing licensed premises, there is limited research on the

actual practice of police in policing licensed premises in Australia, and indeed,

internationally. This research provides a detailed account of a range of strategies that

officers at the operational and strategic/policy-setting levels identify as being utilised

and effective in dealing with crime, violence and antisocial behaviour regarding

licensed premises. What the literature does suggest, and this is supported by this

program of research, is that police can positively influence the licensed premises setting

and their environs. There are diverse strategies that can be employed to achieve public

safety outcomes and officers have demonstrated limited knowledge of these strategies in

a theoretical sense, yet in practice, they are implementing strategies which are regarded

as being effective. Proactive policing or high visibility policing, diversion strategies to

places of safety and enforcement action are preferred practices. Clearly officers do not

favour softer self-regulatory approaches and taking no action is also not a favoured

approach to dealing with public order policing issues.

Partnerships have been identified consistently from all three studies as important

opportunities to enhance public safety in the licensed premises environment. Clearly

not all partnerships are the same and some have been identified as working better than

others. There are significant opportunities for improvement in this area and arguably

the greatest opportunity is for those agencies which have regulatory or legal levers

(Mazerolle & Ransley, 2005) to exercise their authority to ensure behaviours conform to

those that are regarded as best practice and consistent with harm minimisation. Given

the considerable resourcing constraints that public sector agencies, including police

223

organisations, are operating within, it is imperative that agencies work together in

partnerships to achieve mutually beneficial outcomes. This program of research not

only encourages low level operational partnerships but also encourages government and

senior police officers to support and foster strategic partnerships.

For there to be an optimum level of performance in this area then, all

stakeholders (government, non-government and business) need to have an

understanding of best practice management principles and work to give effect to these.

In particular, police are uniquely placed to review their performance having regard to

key themes that have emerged from this research. Such themes are based upon

knowledge of legislation, skill levels, capability to police such premises, barriers which

prevent them so doing, and leveraging off effective partnerships.

The research has examined how police obtain their knowledge, the drivers that

are influential in informing such knowledge, and their motivations (or lack thereof) to

police such contexts. By doing so, this research has a high degree of capability to not

only examine police performance but also to enhance it. Enhancements to police

performance mean greater public safety outcomes for patrons, licensed premises

operators and employees, and police officers themselves.

8.4 Recommendations to police organisations

Based on the findings from the research program, there are a number of key

recommendations for improving police performance both inside and outside licensed

premises.

The first of the key recommendations is to encourage and enhance officer

engagement in the policing of licensed premises. There is both a legislative and a

policy imperative for police to engage with licensed premises patrons and staff. Police

officers themselves have reported that this is a legitimate role for them and they see

their responsibilities to enforce the Liquor Act as being one shared with other agencies.

This research acknowledges that enhancing officer engagement involves a number of

dimensions, including organisational support, removing the obstacles and barriers that

prevent such activity, and increasing officer knowledge and skills. Organisational

support and removing obstacles will be dealt with in other key recommendations.

This research supports that belief that police officers regard the policing of a

broad range of alcohol-related incidents as more problematic than incidents that have no

224

alcohol involvement. Equally, the contexts in which alcohol is consumed, such as

nightclubs, hotels and other such premises, are more difficult to police than others such

as public spaces and homes. Officers have also self-reported that they have reasonably

low levels of knowledge of the Liquor Act yet they are required to respond to a

significant number of alcohol-related incidents both inside and outside licensed

premises.

The second of the key recommendations relates to enhancing officer skill in

responding to alcohol-related incidents in licensed premises. As indicated previously,

alcohol-related issues and alcohol-related contexts present unique challenges and are

self-identified by officers as being problematic to respond to and resolve. Officers have

self-identified that they have reasonable skill levels and that those skill levels are higher

in terms of policing outside licensed premises than inside. There are, however,

significant opportunities to enhance officer skill levels in both knowledge of the

strategies that are effective in policing alcohol-related incidents and in the manner of the

police response. In order to achieve this level of officer skill, the QPS needs to invest in

education and training as one strategy to achieve this. Such education and training

needs to be introduced at pre-Service level (i.e. recruit level) and be reinforced at other

in-Service level training (e.g. specifically targeted in-service short courses).

Increasing the impost on officers time to undertake training is not without its

problems, given the intense pressure on the training curricula within police

organisations (King et al., 1997) and the pressure from the relevant unions, media and

government to ensure that officer working hours are spent on practical policing pursuits

(operational duties) as opposed to non-operational activities, such as education and

training and administrative functions. The education and training curriculum should be

directed at upskilling officers in the knowledge of the Liquor Act, knowledge of

effective strategies, and the effective application of strategies having regard to the

philosophy of harm minimisation.

The third key recommendation is to remove or ameliorate the barriers which

impede or prevent officers from engaging in policing endeavours pertaining to licensed

premises. As part of this research, officers identified the barriers which restrict or

constrain them from policing licensed premises. Issues such as lack of physical

resources, time constraints, safety for police within licensed premises, and officers

being supported from other police (police support), were the most frequent responses.

Police also identified that in order for them to give licensed premises greater

225

prominence then there would need to be more support from government, more

commitment from other stakeholders, safer environments within licensed premises,

greater levels of uncommitted time, and better and more back up. Although government

support, particularly related to the objects of the Liquor Act, will be discussed within

the context of another separate key recommendation, it is worth noting that officers

believe that there is greater scope for government to provide clarity in terms of their

expectations of the police. The research supports that there are numerous issues which

constrain police from policing licensed premises and therefore if, as is suggested in this

research, police should be undertaking high levels of engagement in licensed premises,

then these barriers need to be both identified and systematically ameliorated. The

following strategies therefore need to occur: clear statements of intent from Government

and senior police (discussed in key recommendation four below), more time for police

to undertake proactive policing of licensed premises, more support from other police

(resourcing), enhanced education and training, and greater commitment to specialist

police. In fact, unless strategies are implemented to address these constraining factors,

then police will be unable or unwilling to reach their optimum level of engagement.

The fourth key recommendation advocates that the QPS as an organisation

develops a clear, definitive and unambiguous statement supporting the police effort in

addressing alcohol-related harm in relation to licensed premises. Senior police at key

levels of the organisation have a significant capacity to influence the strategic direction

and policy setting within the Service. The lack of direction, or worse, inconsistent

direction, can have a deleterious effect on police effort, performance and morale. Best

practice dictates that clarity of purpose from senior management is the key to ensuring

that officers understand the strategy that underpins effort. In both Study Two and Study

Three, the organisational vision or mandate is featured prominently. In Study Two,

senior officers indicated that there is likely to be a disconnect in terms of

communication, and this would be greatest with general duties police as opposed to

specialist liquor officers.

Utilising the Three Circle Public Value Model (Moore 1995) as the focus, this

research supports police effort in terms of outcomes and outputs (public value) being

facilitated in an environment where there is an appropriate level of resourcing

(operational capability) and where there is a strong vision (authorising environment).

The authorising environment, in these terms, relates to the legislation, policy and

procedures and the organisational ethos. The clear statement of purpose from the QPS

226

promulgated through every level in an amplified and consistent way is likely to

engender and support police effort in this important context. Although this is implied

by senior officers, such clarity does not currently exist but arguably should.

The fifth recommendation is to support the continuation and expansion of

specialist police officers in areas (police Districts and Regions) of identified need. The

roles of these specialist units are to respond to and to support generalist officers in

dealing with alcohol-related issues, principally those concerning licensed premises.

There are considerable pressures on police agencies to use public resources in ways that

are both ethical and efficient. Naturally, police resources, whether they are fiscal,

human, physical or information/intelligence, are finite. Strategic asset management, in

the policing environment, should rely upon the deployment or use of assets in a way

that has regard for efficiency and effectiveness. Deployment of police resources,

particularly police officers, is increasingly being determined by intelligence-led analysis

of crime trends. Although this research was not concerned with evaluating LEAPS, it is

accepted that a LEAPS-type approach can be an extremely useful and valuable tool in

collecting both intelligence, and crime, violence and antisocial behaviour data in the

pursuit of strategically targeting resources to where they are likely to be of greatest

need. The worth of LEAPS goes beyond its ability to be a useful intelligence gathering

and dissemination tool. The officers that work within the LEAPS Unit have developed

expertise which is not possessed generally by other police. The research supports that

officers have low levels of knowledge and external stakeholders report disparate levels

of skill and interest of officers working in the licensed premises domain. LEAPS

provides an extremely useful vehicle to offer expert assistance to other officers, an

important industry interface, and consistency of approach. The QPS would be well

served to consider its future commitment to LEAPS, which could involve expansion to

other geographical areas of Queensland not currently serviced by this initiative.

The sixth key recommendation is for the QPS to consider the nature of the police

engagement with and inside licensed premises. It is one thing to advocate more

policing inside and outside licensed premises but quite another to stipulate or

recommend the nature of that engagement. There is scant definitive research on what

that intervention should entail. It is, however, recognised in the literature that police

have significant influence when it comes to the regulation of licensed premises and the

reduction of alcohol-related harm (Doherty & Roche, 2003). Licensed premises,

although difficult and problematic contexts to police, are one alcohol-consuming

227

environment that police are capable of influencing. This recommendation therefore

encourages police organisations to take this research and use it as the foundation to

implement high visibility proactive policing initiatives both inside and outside licensed

premises. Where such practices are currently in place then this research should be used

as the lens by which such activity is assessed as being efficient and efficacious.

The last recommendation relates to better recording of alcohol-related matters or

situations where alcohol has played a role. Unsurprisingly, this research has confirmed

findings of other research, which has identified a strong association between police

responses and alcohol. Unfortunately, there is no central reliable data maintained by

QPS, in a contemporaneous sense, identifying the extent that alcohol, and for that

matter other drugs, has in crime, violence and disorder. The technological ability exists

to record such information in what is known as Q-Prime, which is the crime reporting

system operating within the QPS. This information is not generally mandated by policy

and has, up to this point, been discretionary upon the QPS employee entering the data.

The only exception to this is in cases of domestic violence where alcohol and drug

involvement is a mandated field. Quality control through audit and sampling has not

systematically been undertaken to determine the level of completion of this field. Given

the importance for this data to inform policing strategies and public policy there needs

to be consideration of the relative worth of this data, and strategies implemented to

ensure that officers record such data routinely and accurately. The rationale for this is

that this information would serve as valuable intelligence with which to review existing

or new liquor licensing applications as well as providing an evidence-basis by which

police could implement problem-solving strategies.

8.5 Contributions to research

In terms of Study One, there are a number of practical implications associated

with these findings for policing. The first such implication relates to the police

organisation’s understanding the importance of policing licensed premises and thereby

developing a contextual understanding of how difficult and complex such matters are

from the perspective of the operational police officer. The research has identified that

officers attend significant incidents where alcohol is a factor and that alcohol is a

dimension that adds to the complexity and difficulty of responding. A further practical

implication relates to the means by which officers initiate their response. Police officers

228

report attending more incidents outside than inside licensed premises and further that

most of the initiation to incidents, at least at the junior officer level, occurs from sources

other than their self initiation. There is a significant opportunity here for police

agencies to upskill officers and encourage pro-activity in patrolling, particularly inside

such premises. Skill enhancement is likely to lead to elevated primary responses (self

initiation) by the individual officer concerned, and as such, this is seen as a significant

crime prevention strategy, since it prevents offences, or at least intervenes at an earlier

stage in the violence and/or offending cycle.

A further practical implication is the potential for officers to use enforcement of

the Liquor Act more effectively. The literature, as has been outlined previously, has

identified that officers are significantly more likely to prosecute offences at the end-user

level, in preference to higher order offences at the supplier level. This research also

confirms these previous findings. This study provides an opportunity for police

agencies to examine the practice of prosecuting Liquor Act breaches. It is believed that

re-orientating effort to prosecutions at the licensed premises level is likely to have a

significant effect on conforming behaviours towards practices consistent with

responsible service of alcohol.

A further practical implication of the research is the opportunity which exists to

enhance the skill levels of police officers. Self-identified knowledge of effective

strategies has been identified as reasonably low and therefore much more could be done

to enhance knowledge and skill. Despite this, the training agendas of most police

agencies are at capacity, therefore, police agencies need to consider the opportunity

costs associated with giving police and Liquor Act training priority. This research has

also identified that officer skill levels have been positively influenced by the imparting

of skills and knowledge from other officers. Given the significant impacts on formal

training agendas, peer training is an important opportunity for police organisations to

explore, either as a replacement for, or to augment, existing formal training. Enhancing

skills in this context is likely to lead to a range of organisational benefits, including

enhanced presence, increased prosecutions at the licensed premises level, greater officer

confidence and correspondingly better public (and officer) safety outcomes.

The last practical implication for the research is the opportunity for police to

partner with others in the policing of licensed premises. Police have important ‘legal

levers’ (Mazerolle & Ransley, 2005), or authority influencing factors, on which other

agencies can capitalise effectively. Conversely, other agencies that police regularly

229

partner with have extraordinary powers that police can leverage off effectively.

Fortunately, this study has found that police identify that enforcing the Liquor Act is a

shared responsibility and that the partnerships with key agencies work to varying

degrees. There is greater opportunity for police to work with these agencies and it is

believed that this message needs to start from the top at the Government and senior

levels of the service.

The findings from study Two have a number of practical implications for

policing. Arguably, the most significant of these is the belief of senior officers of the

importance of having officers with high degrees of skill, specifically in relation to the

policing of licensed premises. The findings are strongly supportive of officers with

specialist capability and therefore LEAPS officers have been recognised by senior

officers as being highly efficient in policing what is identified as a highly variable and

difficult policing context. The practical implication for policing is therefore, how to

increase the numbers of LEAPS officers, which is problematic given the pressure on

finite human resources and the limited opportunities to influence training. As has been

discussed previously, the police training agenda is always under significant stress and

there is an opportunity cost created by making specialist training a priority. If it is not

possible to increase the quantum of LEAPS officers, then an alternative strategy may be

to enhance the skill levels of existing police to encourage them to actively police

licensed premises. Increasing the number of LEAPS officers and enhancing skills in

general duties police are not mutually exclusive strategies. In an optimum environment

both these strategies would be priorities, particularly given the impacts on public safety,

and importantly, officer safety. A further practical implication of the findings of this

study relates to the importance of and opportunities for partnerships. Despite the view

of senior officers that partnerships are ‘reasonably’ effective there are significant

opportunities for improving such relationships. Theoretically, these relationships are

forged at officer level, however, senior officers at the strategic level of organisations

can have a significant positive impact on inter-agency relationships leading to positive

collaboration.

In terms of Study Three, there are a number of practical implications of these

findings. The most significant of these relates to the opportunity to enhance

partnerships with key stakeholders in the licensed premises context. This study offers a

unique insight into the views and attitudes of external stakeholders. It explores their

attitudes towards police, what police officers do and the strategies they employ, and

230

challenges them to make an assessment of police effectiveness. The study also explores

participants’ attitudes to partnerships in terms of their effectiveness. In doing so it

provides not only a unique insight, but also baseline information from which enhanced

partnerships can occur and be measured against. Importantly, it also creates for

operational police and those at the strategic policy setting level a report card on police

performance in this important area. This then allows operational police to take a more

proactive policing posture in terms of partnerships, as well as encouraging senior police

to capitalise on those partnerships which are key in facilitating public safety. It also

allows senior police the opportunity to examine such relationships within an ethical

framework. This is the case given the important comments that external stakeholders

made about the opportunities for corrupt relationships between police and licensed

premises operators to form.

A further practical implication from this study relates to the differentiation made

between generalist and specialist police. Participants were clearly of the view that

specialist police (e.g. LEAPS officers) were more credentialed and skilled in policing

what is a difficult and challenging context. This was consistent with the attitudes of

senior officers derived from Study Two. The practical implication associated with this

is to enhance the degree of specialisation by increasing the number of LEAPS officers,

or alternatively enhancing the skill levels of general duties officers. In any event, there

are a range of practical and resource impediments associated with this as discussed in

Chapter Six.

As well as practical implications for these findings there are also theoretical

implications. The Three Circle Public Value Model (Alford, 1995) has been influential

in both framing the research questions and helpful in facilitating the examination of the

research findings. Although the relevance of the model has been discussed previously,

there are aspects of Study One which have been enhanced through the application of

such a model. The primary focus of Study One has been at the ‘public value’ dimension

of the model. The beliefs, perceptions, knowledge and skills of officers as they attempt

to achieve public safety outcomes (public value) has been the primary focus. The

model has been particularly instructive in understanding the impact on general duties

officers from the ‘authorising environment’, which includes the legislation, policy,

senior officer direction and government objectives. This program of research has

identified that the authorising environment is an important consideration in

understanding the factors that shape and constrain police behaviours relevant to the

231

policing of licensed premises. This is also the case in terms of the role of senior police

and the government in making the valuable resources (e.g. operational capability)

available to officers to undertake their roles effectively. The application of this model

in this way is novel, as the author has been unable to identify any other occasion where

it has been similarly applied.

8.6 Strengths and limitations of the research

8.6.1 Strengths of the research

The foremost strength of this research program is that the policing of licensed

premises has been examined from three distinct, yet interrelated, perspectives. This has

allowed an examination of this issue from three directions (triangulation effect): from

the perspective of the police officer at the operational level, from the senior officer at

the strategic and policy-setting level of the Police Service, and from the perspective of

external stakeholders. As such, this research program is the first of its kind known to be

undertaken. Although other research has centred on the police intervention in licensed

premises, it has focused on the outputs of officers and has not examined the values,

beliefs or motivational factors of police in this area. However, some limited research

has been done on issues related to knowledge, skills and perceptions of police (Findlay

et al., 2000, 2002; K. L. Smith et al., 2001). This current program of research updates

this knowledge.

A further strength of the research is that it had a considerable theoretical

framework which guided the research program. In particular the research is informed

by the Three Circle Public Value Model (Moore, 1995). This model was particularly

useful in providing a framework from which the three distinct studies could be

conceptualised. The model theorises that ‘public value’, which can be construed as

actions consistent with public safety in a policing licensed premises domain, is

predicated upon factors such as authorising environment and operational capability.

The authorising environment is the policy, rules, regulations and direction from senior

officers, while operational capability is the resourcing and skills of the individual to

achieve the end point (e.g. public safety). Each of the studies examined the relevant

components of the model.

232

8.6.2 Limitations of the research

Although there are considerable strengths with this research there are some

identified limitations. Arguably the most critical and obvious limitation is the author’s

senior rank and prominent role within the QPS. It is acknowledged that this rank and

role can be a strength in terms of accessing data and gaining access to internal and

external participants. However, it can also serve as a limitation in two main areas. The

first of these areas relates to the potential personal bias that the author may unwittingly

bring to the research, given his considerable experience (over 32 year career).

Naturally, this potential for bias can have a significant impact on validity. The second

area relates to the potential for research (interview) participants to provide responses

which may not be honest and forthright, largely because of perceptions of lack of

anonymity. As stated previously, an independent research assistant was employed to

conduct the face-to-face interviews in Studies Two and Three to ameliorate the factors

which might lead to bias. The responses were coded and therefore the author was not in

a position to identify the interviewees and this process was communicated to

participants to ensure them of confidentiality. As a further measure, an academic

reviewer, who was independent of the supervisory team, was also utilised to examine

the process employed in collecting, coding, analysing data and interpreting the results in

Studies Two and Three. The analysis by the external researcher satisfactorally

identified that the research findings were congruent with interview notes and the

outcomes of the thematic analysis process. As such no discrepancies were identified.

A further limitation to the research was that it was centred in BCD and therefore

an argument could be made that the transferability of this to other locations within

Queensland and across Australasia could affect the generalisability of the findings.

BCD is a vibrant environment and one which was deliberately chosen because of the

number of alcohol outlets and the nature and extent of police responses. It is noted

however, that the issues associated with alcohol, licensed premises and public disorder

are not just relevant to the survey area as other areas experience similar situations.

However, the scale of the issues is considerably different.

Another limitation relates to the qualitative questioning of officers to determine

baseline knowledge of strategies which are effective in addressing alcohol-related harm.

It could not be determined, in absolute terms, whether a null response meant that an

officer had ‘no knowledge’ or they were unwilling to respond. Therefore the analysis of

responses, particularly related to the null response, needs to be considered with some

233

caution. This is a limitation which is explained not so much from a methodological

perspective, but is explained potentially through an understanding of human behaviour,

particularly when responding to qualitative research requests. In a similar vein, the

limited objective assessment of knowledge, particularly relevant to Study One, is a

factor which needs to be considered when interpreting the results.

Another relevant consideration is bias associated with collecting self-report data.

This program of research has, in fact, relied upon self-reported data relating to officer

knowledge, skill levels and capability to police licensed premises. There are naturally

issues associated with bias in such data and therefore an opportunity exists to undertake

further research that objectively assesses officer alcohol-policing abilities. This would

then allow the results of this research, in combination with other data which is

objectively obtained, to add considerably to the existing literature in the field.

A further limitation of the research relates to the low response rate initially with

respect to Study Three, which targeted external stakeholders. Although the response

rate was at first low, a second round of invitations led to increased participation.

Purposive sampling was used initially; in the second round of interviews, limited

snowball sampling raised the response level, particularly from those within the liquor

industry. A factor to consider with respect to interviews with external stakeholders was

the changing environment that occurred between Time 1 (early–mid 2008) and Time 2

(early–mid 2009). Public debate about incidents such as ‘glassing’, restricted trade due

to regulatory impediments imposed by OLGR, a Parliamentary Inquiry on alcohol and

licensed premises and intensive media reporting on alcohol-related issues increased the

tension within the industry. This phenomenon may have led to changes in respondent

attitudes between the two time points but this was not able to be controlled for.

Finally, although a primary focus of the research is on officer attitudes, beliefs

and values which were collected utilising quantitative and qualitative means, the data

collected were largely derived from self-identified measures from the relevant officers

themselves. There has been no corroboration with the available objective or

independent data to determine, for example, the exact amount of events that officers

attended in the hope of quantifying the extent to which alcohol is a factor. In fact this

would not be possible as there are no definitive or contemporary means to collect this

information. Therefore officer perception in this area is likely to be the only relevant

and contemporary data at this time.

234

8.7 Suggestions for future research

Clearly, low levels of both officer knowledge relating to effective strategies and

knowledge of the relevant legislation are crucial findings from this research. Naturally,

if policing jurisdictions implement strategies to enhance the knowledge base of officers

then further research needs to be undertaken. This research needs to determine the level

of knowledge and the impact, if any, on the extent and nature of the police effort to

police licensed premises. Such research would be predicated on the assumption or

hypothesis that knowledge and enhanced skill would lead to enhanced engagement in

licensed premises. Of course, given the previous research by Graham and Homel

(2008), the nature of the engagement is something requiring further investigation.

A further area of potential research could be an investigation of the potential for

police officers to engage in inappropriate or corrupt behaviour through inappropriate

associations with licensed premises operators. Study Three interviews identified

comments from a representative of the liquor industry (nightclub) who commented that

police associating with licensed premises (particularly nightclubs) can be a “breeding

ground for corruption”. Naturally, there are obvious methodological and ethical issues

associated with undertaking this type of research; however, it is a subject worthy of

exploration given recommendations in this research that the policing of licensed

premises should be both supported and enhanced. The potential for this to expose

individual officers to corruption and the police organisation to organisational risk, make

this a necessary area for investigation.

There needs to be a commitment from police agencies and academic institutions

that policing approaches, consistent with international best practice, need to be

examined, researched and reported upon. Police agencies need to embrace the

philosophy of continual improvement in order to capitalise on the theoretical research

so as to implement strategies which may prove to be effective. Police agencies of the

future are likely to have considerable pressures, particularly financial, impacting their

operations (Ayling et al., 2009). On this basis, opportunities to engage in research hold

significant utility in shaping police practices (Weisburd & Neyroud, 2009). This is

certainly the case for policing licensed premises research.

235

8.8 Conclusion

Police officers at both the operational level and the strategic policy-setting level

need to appreciate that the policing of licensed premises is important. The literature

supports that the effective policing of licensed premises has the potential to reduce

alcohol-related crime, violence and antisocial behaviour. Clearly, this is an area of

policing where there are high volume issues, given the quantum of alcohol use in the

community and the significant amount of misuse that occurs. Police can make a

difference in terms of reducing alcohol-related harm. Not only are preventative policing

responses a preferred approach from an ethical perspective, since they prevent people

from being victims of crime and stop potential offenders from offending, but such

responses also contribute positively to society’s sense of order and justice. But in order

for police to engage in such pursuits, something needs to happen.

There needs to be a mechanism to coordinate activity and to utilise intelligence in

the pursuit of harm reduction at licensed premises. In the Queensland, Australia

context, LEAPS has proven to be an extremely useful strategy in this regard. There also

needs to be clear and unambiguous statements from police leaders that the policing of

licensed premises is organisationally important and supported. There also needs to be

an organisational investment in skilling police in responding to licensed premises whilst

systematically dismantling the barriers which prevent police from policing licensed

premises most effectively. Clearly police do not like and therefore may be reluctant to

police such premises, despite the clear opportunities that this type of policing has to

reduce crime, violence and antisocial behaviours. Little wonder perhaps, given that

licensed premises can be noisy, inhospitable and crowded with intoxicated patrons. In

fact, police identify that alcohol-related incidents are more difficult than a broad range

of other types of incidents to police. This exacerbates the problems at licensed premises

that are in themselves contextually very difficult to police.

A significant barrier which needs to be overcome is the perception of the lack of

Government support. There is also the need for structural changes and operational

enhancements (e.g. resourcing and training) which provide more support to officers.

The task of policing such uncertain, complex and sometimes hostile and aggressive

contexts is usually the domain of the most junior and often inexperienced officers.

Enhancing officer skill levels and their knowledge of and capability to employ a broad

236

array of effective strategies needs to be given priority, if police agencies want to achieve

enhanced efficiencies from officers in this vitally important facet of police work.

Drinking and licensed venues are an integral part of Australian society and are

likely to be here to stay. While licensed premises can make a positive economic and

social contribution they can also be the focal point for significant alcohol-related crime

and violence. Therefore it seems logical that police need to work collaboratively with

the liquor industry and other stakeholders to reduce harm in and around licensed

premises. Little is to be achieved from using purely punitive approaches and therefore

‘carrot-and-stick’ approaches are probably the most beneficial in terms of positive

community outcomes. For relationships between the regulatory stakeholders and the

licensed premises stakeholders to be realised, there needs to be capacity building and

commitment on both sides. This will require a commitment to change in some cases.

Change is inevitable and police are uniquely placed to be the positive agents in

that regard. This research provides an evidence basis which can potentially influence

such change.

237

REFERENCES

Adams, K., Sandy, L., Smith, L., & Triglone, B. (2008) Drug use monitoring in

Australia: 2007 annual report on drug use among police detainees. Research

and Public Policy Series, No. 93. Australian Institute of Criminology,

Canberra, ACT.

Agarwal, D. P. (2002). Cardio protective effects of light-moderate consumption of

Alcohol: A review of putative mechanism. Alcohol and Alcoholism, 37(5),

409–415.

Akers, R. L. (1998). Social learning and social structure: A general theory of crime

and deviance. Boston, MA: North eastern University Press.

Alford, J. (2000). Exploring public sector strategy. The implications of ‘publicness’ for

strategic management theory. In G Johnson & Kevan Scholes (Eds.),

Exploring Public Sector Strategy. London, Prentice-Hall.

Appleby, E. (2000). Selling drink to underage adolescents and getting away with it.

Addiction, 95, 1315

Arnold, M. J., & Laidler, T. J. (1994). Situational and environmental factors in alcohol-

related violence. Canberra, Australia: Australian Government Publishing

Service.

Arro, P., Crook, G., & Fenlon, T. (1992). The nature and extent of alcohol related

incidents requiring police attention in South-East Queensland. Brisbane,

Australia: Department of Health and Queensland Police Service.

Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2006). Census 2006. Retrieved from

www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/d3310114.nsf/home/Census+data

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2000). Australia’s Health 2000: The

seventh biennial health report of the australian institute of health and welfare.

Canberra, Australia: Author.

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2002). National Drug Strategy Household

Survey: Detailed findings. Canberra, Australia: Author.

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2004). National Drug Strategy Household

Survey: First Results. Canberra, Australia: Author.

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2008). National Drug Strategy Household

Survey: First Results. Canberra, Australia: Author.

238

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2011). National Drug Strategy Household

Survey: First Results. Canberra, Australia: Author.

Ayling, J., Grabosky, P., & Shearing, C. (2009). Lengthening the arm of the law:

Enhancing police resources in the twenty-first century. New York, NY:

Cambridge University Press.

Ayres, I., & Braithwaite, J. (1992). Responsive regulation: Transcending the

deregulation debate. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Barbor, T., Caetano, R., Casswell, S., Edwards, G., Giesbrcht, N., Graham, K., …

Rossow, I. (2010). Alcohol: No ordinary commodity. Oxford, UK: Oxford

University Press.

Bartholomew, A. (1985). Alcohol drugs and crime. Police Life, (May), 82–83.

Barton, A., & Evans, R. (1999). Proactive policing on Merseyside (Police Research

Series paper 105). London, UK: Crown Publishing.

Boles, S.M., & Miotto, K. (2003). Substance abuse and violence: A review of the

literature. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 8(2), 155–174.

Braga, A., & Weisburd, D. (2009) Editors’ Introduction: Empirical Evidence on the

Relevance of Place in Criminology. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, vol.

26, issue 1, March, pp. 1-6

Bratton, W. (1997). Crime is down in New York City: Blame the police. In N. Dennis

(Ed.), Zero tolerance: Policing a free society. London, UK: Institute of

Economic Affairs.

Bratton, W., with Knobler, P. (1998). Turnaround: How America’s top cop reversed the

crime epidemic. New York, NY: Random House.

Brisbane Central District (BCD). (2007). BCD environmental scan 2007. Brisbane,

Australia: Queensland Police Service.

Brisbane Central District (BCD). BCD operational plan 2007-08. Brisbane, Australia:

Queensland Police Service.

Brisbane City Council (BCC). (2012). Valley Special Entertainment Precinct

background. Retrieved from http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/planning-

building/current-projects

Briscoe, S., & Donnelly, N. (2001a). Assaults on licensed premises in inner urban areas.

Alcohol Studies Bulletin, No. 2.

239

Briscoe, S., & Donnelly, N. (2001b). Temporal and regional aspects of violence and

disorder in NSW. Drug Research Unit of Curtin University & NSW Bureau of

Crime Statistics and Research.

Briscoe, S., & Donnelly, N. (2003). Problematic licensed premises for assaults in inner

Sydney, Newcastle and Wollongong. The Australian and New Zealand

Journal of Criminology 36(1), 18-33.

Broderick, J. (1987). Police in a time of change (2nd ed.). Prospect Heights, IL:

Waveland Press.

Brown, L., & Willis, A. (1985). Authoritarianism in British Police: Importation,

socialisation or myth? Journal of Personality of Social Psychology, 36, 734–

750.

Bruun, K., Edwards, G., Lumio, M., Makela, K., Pan, L., Popham, R. E., … Osterberg,

E. (1975). Alcohol control polices in public health perspective. Helsinki,

Finland: Finnish Foundation for Alcohol Studies.

Bryant, M., & Williams, P. (2000). Trends and Issues in crime and criminal justice: No.

171. Alcohol and other drug-related violence and non-reporting. Canberra,

Australia: Australian Institute of Criminology.

Burns, L., & Coumarelos, C. (1993). Policing pubs: Evaluation of a licensing

enforcement strategy. Sydney, Australia: New South Wales Bureau of Crime

Statistics and Research.

Burns, L., Flaherty, B., Ireland, S., & Francis, M. (1995) Policing pubs: What happens

to crime? Drug and Alcohol Review, 14, 369–375

Bushman, B. J. (1997). Effects of alcohol on human aggression: Validity of proposed

explanations. In D. Fuller, R. Dietrich & E. Gottheil, (Eds.), Recent

developments in alcoholism: Alcohol and violence (Vol. 13, pp. 227–243).

New York, NY: Plenum.

Bushman, B. J., & Cooper, H. M. (1990). Effects on alcohol on human aggression: An

integrative research review. Psychological Bulletin, 107(3), 341–354.

Bushnel, J. A., & Bakker, L. W. (1997). Substance use disorders among men in prison:

a New Zealand study. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry,

31(4), 577–581.

Cameron, M. (2000). Trends and Issues in crime and criminal justice: No. 154. Young

men and violence prevention. Canberra, Australia: Australian Institute of

Criminology.

240

Carey, K. B. (2002). Understanding binge drinking: Introduction to the special issue.

Psychology of Addictive Behaviours, 15(4), 283–286.

Carrao, G., Rubbiati, L., Bagnardi, V., Zambon, A., & Poikolaninen, K. (2000). Alcohol

and coronary heart disease: A meta-analysis. Addiction, 95(10), 1505–1523.

Casswell, S. (1991). Background paper for inter-regional meeting on alcohol related

problems, Tokyo, Japan. Aukland, New Zealand: Alcohol & Public Health

Unit, University of Auckland.

Chadwick, D. J., & Goode, J. A. (Eds.) (1998). Alcohol and cardiovascular diseases.

New York, NY: Wiley.

Chikritzhs, T., Jonas, H., Heale, P., Dietze, P., Hanlin, K., & Stockwell, T. (1999).

Alcohol-caused deaths and hospitalizations in Australia, 1990-199. (National

Alcohol Indicators, Technical Report No. 1). Perth, Western Australia:

National Drug Research Institute, Curtin University of Technology.

Chikritzhs, T., & Stockwell, T. (2002). Impact of later trading hours for Australian

public houses (hotels) on levels of violence. Journal of Studies on Alcohol,

63(5), 591–599.

Chikritzhs, T., Stockwell, T. R., & Masters, L. (1997). Evaluation of the public health

and safety impact of extended trading permits for Perth hotels and night-clubs.

Perth, Western Australia: The National Centre for Research into the

Prevention of Drug Abuse, Division of Health Sciences, Curtin University of

Technology.

Clarke, R. V. (1995). Situational crime prevention: Its theoretical basis and practical

scope. Crime & Justice, 4, 225–256.

Clarke, R. V. (1997). Situational crime prevention: Successful case studies (2nd ed.).

New York, NY: Harrow and Heston.

Clarke, R. V., & Homel, R. (1997). A revised classification of techniques of situational

crime prevention. In S. P. Lab (Ed.). Crime prevention at a crossroads (pp.

21–35) . Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.

Collins, D. J., & Lapsley, H. M. (2002). Counting the cost: Estimates of the social costs

of drug abuse in Australia in 1999-9. Canberra, Australia: Commonwealth

Department of Health and Ageing.

Colman, A. M., & Gorman, L. P. (1982). Conversation, dogmatism, and

authoritarianism in British police officers. Sociology, 16, 1–11.

241

Committee on the Office of the Ombudsman and the Police Integrity Commission

(2009). Report on an inquiry into early intervention systems in the NSW

Police Force. Parliament of New South Wales, Report No. 5/54 – March 2009.

Cookson, H. (1992). Alcohol use and offence type in young offenders. British Journal

of Criminology, 32(3), 352.

Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded Theory research: Procedures, canons and

evaluative criteria, Qualitative Sociology, 13(1), 3-21.

Cornish, D., & Clark, R. V. (2003). Opportunities, precipitators and criminal decisions:

A reply to Wotley’s critique of situational crime prevention. In M. J. Smith, &

Cornish, D. B. (Eds.), Theory for practice in situational crime prevention (pp.

41–96). New York, NY: Criminal Justice Press.

Coutelle, C., Seitz, H., Hohn, B., Benesova, M., Oneta, C., Quattrochi, P., . . . Bastert,

G.(2004). Risk factors in alcohol-associated breast cancer: Alcohol

dehydrogenase polymorphism and estrogens. International Journal of

Oncology, 20(4), 1127–1132.

Davey, J. D. (2003). Young women, drinking and gender: Behaviour, motivations and

outcomes. PhD Thesis, School of Population Health, The University of

Queensland, Australia.

Davey, J., Davey, T., & Obst, P. (2002). Alcohol consumption and drug use in a sample

of Australian university students. Youth Studies Australia, 21(3), 25–32.

Davey, J., & French, N. (1995). Data analysis of the AIMS DATA. Brisbane, Australia:

School of Social Science, Queensland University of Technology.

Day, P., Breetzke, G., Kingham, S., & Campbell, M. (2012). Close proximity to alcohol

outlets is associated with increased serious violence crime. Australian and

New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 36(1), 48–54.

Deitrich, R.A., & Erwin, V.G., (Eds. (1996). Pharmacological effects of ethanol on the

nervous system. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

De Lint, W. (1998). Regulating autonomy: Police discretion as a problem for training.

Canadian Journal of Criminology, 40, 277–304.

Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd

ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Dingwall, G. (2006). Alcohol and crime. Cullompton, UK: Willan Publishing.

Dodenhoff, P. (1996). Len salutes its 1996 people of the year, the NYPD and its

COMPSAT process. Law Enforcement News XXII, 458, 1–5.

242

Doherty, J., & Roche, A. M. (2003). Alcohol and licensed premises: Best practice in

policing. A monograph for Police and Policy Makers. Australasian Centre for

Policing Research, Commonwealth of Australia.

Duailibi, S., Ponicki, W., Grube, J., Pinsky, I., Laranjeira, R., & Raw, M. (2007). The

effect of restricting opening hours on alcohol-related violence. American

Journal of Public Health, 97(12), 2276–2280.

Edwards, G., Anderson, P., Babor, T. F., Casswell, S., Freernce, R., Giesbrecht, N., …

Skog, O. (1994). Alcohol policy and the public good. Oxford, UK: Oxford

University Press.

Egger, S., & Findlay, M. (1988). The politics of police discretion in understanding

crime and criminal justice. In M. Findlay & R. Hogg, R. (Eds.), (p. 212).

Sydney, Australia: The Law Book Company.

Eliany, M., & Rush, B. (1992). How effective are alcohol and other drug prevention

and treatment programs? A review of evaluation studies. Ottawa, Canada:

Minister of Supply & Services.

English, D. R., Holman, C. D. J., Milne, E., Winter, G., Hulse, G. K., Codde, J. P., …

Ryan, G.A. (1995). The quantification of drug caused morbidity and mortality

in Australia. Canberra, Australia: Commonwealth Department of Human

Services and Health.

Exum, M. L. (2006). Alcohol and aggression: An integration of findings from

experimental studies. Journal of Criminal Justice, 34(2), 131–145.

Ferrari, P., Jenab, M., Norat, T., Moskai, A., Slimani, N., & Olsen, A., … Riboli, E.

(2007). Lifetime and baseline alcohol intake and risk of colon rectal cancers

in European prospective investigation into cancer and nutrition (EPIC).

International Journal of Cancer, 121(9), 2065–2072.

Fielding, N. O. (1995). Community policing. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Fielding, N. O. (2005). Concepts and theory of community policing. The Howard

Journal, 44(5), 460–472.

Findlay, R. A., Sheehan, M. C., Davey, J., Brodie, H., & Rynne, F. (2000). Managing

alcohol-related incidents: Perceptions of police officers. International Journal of

Police Science and Management, 3(1), 26–39.

Findlay, R. A., Sheehan, M. C., Davey, J., Brodie, H., & Rynne, F. (2002). Liquor law

enforcement: Policy and practice in Australia. Drugs: Education, Prevention

and Policy, 9(1), 85–94.

243

Fitzgerald, R., & Jordon, T. (2009). Under the influence: A history of alcohol in

Australia. Sydney, Australia: Harper Collins.

Gallagher, T. (1979). Discretion in police enforcement (From social psychology and

discretionary law). Washington, DC: National Criminal Justice Reference

Service, US Department of Justice.

Gee, R., & Scott, A. (1998). Partnership policing in context implementing change in

policing strategies in the Queensland Police Service. Paper presented at the

Australian Institute of Criminology and the National Campaign Against

Violence And Crime, Hobart.

Gladwell, M. (2002). The tipping point: How little things can make a big difference.

Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Co.

Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The

Qualitative Report, 8(4), 597–607.

Goldman, M. S., Brown, S. A., & Christiansen, B. A. (1987). Expectancy theory:

Thinking about drinking. In H.T. Blane & K. E. Leonard (Eds.), Psychological

theories of drinking and alcoholism (pp. 181–226). New York, NY: Guilford

Press.

Goldsmith, J. A. (1990). Autosegmental and metrical phonology. Oxford, UK: Basil

Blackwell.

Gottfredson, M., & Gottfredson, D. (1988). Decision making in criminal justice:

Toward the rational exercise of discretion (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Platinum

Press.

Graham, K., & Homel, R. (1997). Creating safer bars. In M. Plant, E. Single & T.

Stockwell (Eds.), Alcohol: Minimizing the harm (pp. 171–192). London, UK:

Free Association Press.

Graham, K., & Homel, R. (2008). Raising the bar: Preventing aggression in and

around bars, pubs and clubs. Cullompton, UK: Willian Publishing.

Graham, K., LaRocque, L., Yetman, R., Ross, T. J., & Guistra, E. (1980). Aggression

and barroom environments, Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 41, 277–292.

Graham, K., Leonard, K. E., Room, R., Wild, T. C., Pihl, R. O., Bois, C., & Single, E.

(1998). Current directions in research on understanding and preventing

intoxicated aggression. Addiction, 93(5), 659–676.

244

Graham, K., Osgood, D. W., Wells, S., & Stockwell, T. (2006). To what extent is

intoxication associated with aggression in bars? A multilevel analysis.

Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 67(3), 382–390.

Graham, K., Schmidt, G., & Gillis, K. (1996). Circumstances when drinking leads to

aggression: An overview of research findings. Contemporary Drug Problems,

23(3), 493–557.

Graham, K., West, P., & Wells, S. (2000). Evaluating theories of alcohol-related

aggression using observations of young adults in bars. Addiction, 95(6), 847–

863.

Graham, K., West, P., & Wells, S. (2001). Aggression among young adults in the social

context of the bar. Addiction Research, 9, 193–219.

Greenfield, L. A. (1998). Alcohol and crime: An analysis of national data on the

prevalence of alcohol involvement in crime. Washington, DC: Office of Justice

Programs.

Gruenwald, P. J. (1993). Alcohol problems and the control of availability: Theoretical

and empirical issues. In M. E. Hilton & G. Bloss. (Eds.), Economic and

prevention of alcohol-related problems (NIAAA Research Monograph #25).

Bethesda, MD: US Government Printing Press.

Guba, E., & Lincoln, Y. (1989). Purposive sampling techniques. Newbury Park, CA:

Sage Publications.

Gutjahr, E., Gmel, G., & Rehm, J. (2001). Relation between average alcohol

consumption and disease: An overview. European Addiction Research, 7(3),

117–127.

Hadfield, P. (2006). Bar wars: Contesting the night in contemporary British cities.

Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Hamajima, N., Hirose, K., Tajima K., Rohan, T., Calle, E. E., Heath, C. W. Jr., & The

Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer. (2002). Alcohol,

tobacco and breast cancer – collaborative reanalysis of individual data from 53

epidemiological studies, including 58 515 women with breast cancer and 95

067 women without the disease. British Journal of Cancer, 87(11), 1234–

1245.

Hauritz, M., Homel, R., McIllwain, G., Burrows, T., & Townsley, M. (1998). Reducing

violence in licensed venues through community safety action projects: The

Queensland experience. Contemporary Drug Problems, 25(3), 511–551.

245

Henkel, J., Sheehan, E., & Reichel, P. (1997). Relation of police misconduct to

authoritarianism. Journal of Social Behaviour and Personality, 12, 551–555.

Henry, V. (2002). The Compstat paradigm: Management accountability in policing,

business, and the public sector. New York, NY: Looseleaf Law Publications.

Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency. Berkley: University of California Press.

Hoaken, P. N. S., & Phil, R. O. (2000). The effects of alcohol intoxication on aggressive

responses in men and women. Alcohol and Alcoholism, 35(5), 471–477.

Holder, H. D. (1993). Changes in access to and availability of alcohol in the United

States: Research and policy and implications. Addiction, 88(s1), S67–74.

Homel, R. (1998). Policing alcohol problems. In T. O'Connor Shelley & A. C. Grant

(Eds.), Problem-oriented policing: Crime-specific problems, critical issues

and making problem-oriented policing work (pp. 123–151). Washington, DC:

Police Executive Research Forum.

Homel, R., & Clark, J. (1994). The prediction of violence in pubs and clubs. In R.

Clarke (Ed.), Crime Prevention Studies (Vol. 3, pp. 1-46). Monsey, NY:

Criminal Justice Press.

Homel, R., Hauritz, M., Wortley, R., McIlwain, G., & Carvolth, R. (1997). Preventing

alcohol related crime through community action: The Surfers Paradise Safety

Action Project. In R. Homel (Ed.), Policing for prevention: Reducing crime,

public intoxication, and injury. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.

Homel, R., McIllwain, G., & Carvolth, R. (2004). Creating safer drinking environments.

In N. Heather & T. Stockwell (Eds.), The essential handbook of treatment and

prevention of alcohol problems. Sussex, UK: Wiley and Sons.

Homel, R., & Tomsen, S. (1991). Pubs and violence: Violence, public drinking, and

public policy. Current Affairs Bulletin (December), 20–27.

Homel, R. & Tomsen, S. (1993). Hot spots for violence: The environments of pubs and

clubs. In H. Strang & S. Gerull (Eds.), Homicide: Patterns, prevention and

control. Proceedings of a conference held 12–14 May 1992 (Vol. 17 of

Australian Institute Conference Proceedings). Canberra, Australia: Australian

Institute of Criminology. Retrieved from

http://aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/proceedings/17/homel-tomsen.pdf

Homel, R., Thomsen, S., & Thommeny, J. (1991). The problem of violence on licensed

premises: The Sydney Study (National Workshop on Research into Licensed

246

Drinking Environment). Melbourne: National Centre for Research into the

Prevention of Drug Abuse, Curtin University of Technology.

Homel, R., Tomsen, S., & Thommeny, J. (1992). Public drinking and violence: Not just

an alcohol problem. Journal of Drug Issues, 22, 679–697.

Indermaur, D., & Upton, K. (1998). Alcohol and drug patterns of prisoners in Perth.

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 21(3), 144–167.

Ireland, C. S. (1993). Police and alcohol-regulation or control of violence: What is the

most appropriate operational focus for police? Paper presented at the

Perspectives for Change Conference, Wellington, New Zealand.

Ireland, C. S. & Thommeny, J. L. (1993). The crime cocktail: Licensed premises,

alcohol and street offences. Drug and Alcohol Review, 12, 143–150.

Jeffs, B. W., & Saunders, W. M. (1983). Minimizing alcohol related offences by

enforcement of the existing licensing legislation. British Journal of Addiction,

78, 67–77

Jersild, D. (2002). Alcohol in the vulnerable lives of college women. Chronicle of

Higher Education, 48(38), B.10–B.11.

Jochelson, R. (1997). Crime and Place: An analysis of assaults and robberies in inner

Sydney. Sydney, Australia: New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and

Research.

Johnston, L. D., O'Malley, P. M., & Bachman, J. G. (1996). National survey results on

drug use from the Monitoring the Future study, 1975-1994: Volume I. College

students and young adults. (NIH Publication No. 96-4027). Rockville, MD:

National Institute on Drug Abuse.

Jonas H. A, Dobson A. J., & Brown W. J (2000). Patterns of alcohol consumption in

young Australian women: Socio-demographic factors, health-related

behaviours and physical health. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public

Health, 24, 185–191.

Kallmen, H., & Gustafson, R. R. (1998). Alcohol and disinhibition. European

Addiction Research, 4(4), 150–162.

Kelling, G. L., & Coles, C. M. (1996). Broken windows: Restoring order and reducing

crime in our communities. New York, NY: Free Press, NY.

King, T., Allsop, S., Connolly, K., Hamilton, M., Lindsay, F., Ritter, A., … Laurie, S.

(1997). Professional Training and Development Strategy Plan. Melbourne,

Australia: Turning Point Alcohol and Drug Centre.

247

Kinsey, R., & Young, J. (1982). Police autonomy and the politics of discretion. In D.

Cowell et al. (Eds.), Policing the riots. 118-134. London, UK: Junction Books.

Kuo, M., Wechsler, H., Greenberg, P., & Lee, H. (2003). The marketing of alcohol to

college students: The role of low prices and special promotions. American

Journal of Preventive Medicin, 25(3), 204–211.

Lang, E., & Rumbold, G. (1997). The effectiveness of community-based interventions

to reduce violence in and around licensed premises: A comparison of three

Australian models. Contemporary Drug Problems, 24, 805–826.

Lang, E., Stockwell, T., Rydon, P., & Lockwood, A. (1995). Drinking settings and

problems of intoxication. Addiction Research, 3, 141–149.

Lang. E., Stockwell, T., Rydon, P., & Gamble, C. (1992). Drinking settings, alcohol

related harm, and support for prevention policies: Results of a survey of

persons residing in the Perth metropolitan area. Bently, Australia: National

Centre for Research into the Prevention of Drug Abuse.

Leonard, K. E., Quigley, B. M., & Collins, L. (2003). Drinking personality and bar

room environmental characteristics as predictors of involvement in barroom

aggression. Addictive Behaviors, 28(9), 1681–1700.

Levene, H. (1960). Robust tests for equality of variances. In Ingram Olkin, Harold

Hotelling, et al. (pp. 278–292). Contributions to Probability and Statistics:

Essays in Honor of Harold Hotelling. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Lilly, J. R., Cullen, F. T. & Ball, R. R. (1995). Criminological theory: Context and

consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Liquor Act. (1992). (Qld), Government Printer, Brisbane, Queensland.

Lindsay, J. (2005). Drinking in Melbourne pubs and clubs: A study of alcohol

consumption contexts. Clayton, Australia: School of Political and Social

Inquiry, Monash University.

Macintyre, S., & Homel, R. (1994). Paradise Lost?: A study of interior design,

crowding and aggression in nightclubs. Brisbane, Australia: Centre for Crime

Policy and Public Safety, Griffith University.

Macintyre, S., & Homel, R. (1997). Danger on the dance floor: A study of interior

design, crowding and aggression in nightclubs. In R. Homel (Ed.), Crime

Prevention Studies: Vol. 7. Policing prevention: Reducing crime, public

intoxication, and injury (pp. 91–113). Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.

248

Makkai, T., & Payne, J. (2003). Drugs and crime: A study of incarcerated male

offenders. (Research and Public Policy Series No. 52). Canberra, Australia:

Australian Institute of Criminolgy. Retrieved from

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/current%20 series/rpp/41-60/rpp52.aspx

Mallick, J., & Banfield, B. (2007). Pubs and clubs: Addressing alcohol-related harms

within Licensed Venues. Melbourne, Australia: Australian Drug Foundation.

Marsh, P., & Kirby, K. (1992). Drinking and public disorder. Oxford, UK: Alden Press.

Martin, C., Wyllie, A., & Casswell, S. (1992). Types of New Zealand drinkers and their

associated alcohol-related problems. Journal of Drug Issues, 22, 733–796.

Martin, P., Freeman, J., Davey, J., & Palk, G. (in press). Officers’ perspectives of

policing alcohol-related incidents in and around licensed premises. Police

Practice and Research: An International Journal.

Mazerolle, L., & Ransley, J. (2005). Third Party Policing. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge

University Press.

Mazerolle, L., White, G., Ransley, J., & Ferguson, P. (2012). Violence in and around

entertainment districts: A longitudinal analysis of the impact of late-night

lockout legislation. Law and Policy, 34, (1), 55–79.

MCM Research. (1993). Keeping the peace: A guide to the prevention of alcohol-

related disorder. London, UK: Portman Group.

McDonald, P. P. (2002). Managing police operations: Implementing the NYPD Crime

Control Model using COMPSAT. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.

McMurran, M. (1999). Alcohol and violence. Child Abuse Review, 8, 219–230.

McKnight, A. J., & Streff, F. M. (1994). The effect of enforcement upon service of

alcohol to intoxicated patrons of bars and restaurants. Accident Analysis &

Prevention, 26, 79–88

Middleton, A. (1992). Police perceptions and attitudes in Victoria. Melbourne,

Victoria, Australia: Methods and Applied Research Unit, Victoria Police

Service, Melbourne.

Ministerial Council for Police and Emergency Management – Police. (2008). Directions

in Australasian & New Zealand Policing 2008-2011(DANZP). Melbourne,

Australia: Australia New Zealand Policing Advisory Agency (ANZPAA).

Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy. (2009, 24 April). Communiqué. Retrieved from

http://www.nationaldrugstrategy.gov.au/internet/drugstrategy/publishing.nsf/C

249

ontent/CBF225049007E97CCA2575A2001E9996/$File/090424%20MCDC%

20Communique.pdf

Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy. (2004). The National Drug Strategy: Australia’s

integrated framework 2004–2009. Canberra, Australia: Commonwealth of

Australia.

Moore, H. (1995). Creating public values: Strategic management in government.

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

MRL Research Group. (1993). Attitudes towards the strategic plan among police staff

(Research report). Wellington, New Zealand: Author.

Muller, J., Maclean, R., & Biggs, H. (2009). The impact of a supportive leadership

program in a policing organisation from the participants’ perspective. Work. A

Journal of Prevention, Assessment & Rehabilitation, 32(1), 69–79.

Murgraff, V., Parrott, A., & Bennet, P. (1999). Risky single-occasion drinking amongst

young people: Definition, correlates, policy, and intervention. A broad

overview of research findings. Alcohol and Alcoholism, 34(1), 3–14.

National Health and Medical Research Council. (2001). Australian Alcohol Guidelines:

Health risks and benefits. Canberra, Australia: Author.

National Institute of Justice. (1991). Drug use forecasting: Drugs and crime 1990

Annual Report. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice.

Nicholas, R. (2010). An environmental scan on alcohol and other drug issues facing

law enforcement in Australia 2010. Hobart, Australia: National Drug Law

Enforcement Research Fund.

Office of Liquor & Gaming Regulation. (2009). [Webpage]. Retrieved 15 November,

2009 from http://www.olgr.qld.gov.au/resources/index.php/liquor/

Palk, G. R. M. (2008). The nature and extent of policing alcohol related crime and

reducing violence in and around late night entertainment areas. PhD Thesis,

Carrs-Q, QUT, Brisbane, Australia.

Palk, G. R. M., Davey, J. D., & Freeman, J E. (2007a). Perspectives on the effectiveness

of late-night liquor trading lockout legislative provision. Policing: An

International Journal of Police Strategies and Management, 23(4), 465–492.

Palk, G. R. M., Davey, J. D., & Freeman, J. E. (2007b). The prevalence and

characteristics of alcohol-related incidents requiring police attendance.

Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 68(4), 575–581.

250

Parks, K. A., & Zetes-Zanatta, L. M. (1999). Women’s bar related victimisation:

Refining and testing a conceptual model. Aggressive Behaviour, 25, 349–364.

Peacock, C. (1992). International policies on alcohol impaired: A review. International

Journal of the Addictions, 27(2), 187–208.

Pernanen, K. (1998). Prevention of alcohol-related violence. Contemporary Drug

Problems, 25(3), 477–509.

Pernanen, K., Cousineau, M. M., Brochu, S., & Sun, F. (2002). Proportions of crimes

associated with alcohol and other drugs in Canada. Montreal. Canadian

Centre on Substance Abuse.

Perrott, S. B., & Taylor, D. M. (1995). Attitudinal differences between police

Constables and their supervisors: Potential influences of personality, work,

environment, and occupational role. Criminal Justice Behavior, 22, 326–339.

Pike, M. S. (1985). The principles of policing. London, UK: Macmillan.

Prenzler, T., & Sarre, R. (2009). The criminal justice system. In H. Hays & T. Prenzler

(Eds.), An introduction to crime and criminology, 259–273. Sydney, Australia:

Pearson.

Presley, C. A., Leichliter P.W., & Meilman J. S. (1999). College factors that influence

drinking. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, Supplement, (14), 82–90.

Puddy, I. B., Rakic, V., Dimmitt, S. B., & Beilin, L. J. (1999). Influence of patterns of

drinking on cardiovascular risk factors: A review. Addiction, 94(5), 649–663.

Queensland Police Service. (2010). Annual Report 2009-10. Brisbane, Australia:

Author.

Queensland Police Service. (2010). Statistical Review 2009-10, Brisbane, Australia:

Author.

Queensland Police Service. (2009). Strategic Plan 2009-13, Brisbane, Australia: Author

Rallings, M., Martin, P., & Davey, J. (2005). A prospective study of alcohol

consumption rates of first-year Australian police officers. Policing: An

International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 28(2), 206–220.

Rehm, J., Room, R., Monteiro, M., Gmel, G., Graham, K., Rehn, N., … Jernigan, D.

(2003). Alcohol as a risk factor for global burden of disease. European

Addiction Research, 9(4), 157–164.

Richardson, A., & Budd, T. (2003). Alcohol, crime and disorder: A study of young

adults. London, UK: Home Office.

251

Rolfe, J. (1995). Decision making of police forward commanders in high-risk situations.

Doctoral Dissertation. Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane,

Australia.

Room, R., & Rossow, I. (2001). The share of violence attributable to drinking. Journal

of Substance Use, 6, 218–28

Room, R., Rehm, J., Trotter, R. H. II, Paglia, A., & Ustun, T. B. (2001). Cross-cultural

views on stigma, valuation, parity, and societal values towards disability. In T.

B. Ustun, S. Chatterji, J. E. Bicenback, R. T. Trotter II, R. Room, J. Rehm, &

S. Saxena (Eds.), Disability and culture: Universalism and diversity (pp. 247-

91). Seattle, WA: Hoigrefe and Huber.

Rowe, S., Wiggers, J., Kingsland, M., Nicholas, C., & Wolfenden, L. (2012). Alcohol

consumption and intoxication among people involved in police-recorded

incidents of violence and disorder in non-metropolitan New South Wales.

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 36, 33–40

Rossow, I., Pape, H., & Wichstroem, L. (1999). Young, wet and wild? Associations

between alcohol intoxication and violent behaviour in adolescence. Addiction,

94(7), 1017–1031.

Rossow, I. (2004). Alcohol consumption and homicides in Canada, 1950–1999

Contemporary Drug Problems, 31(3), 541–560.

Rydon, P. (1994). Alternative policing strategies. In T. Stockwell (Ed.), An

examination of the appropriateness and efficacy of liquor-licensing laws

across Australia (pp. 233–249). Canberra, Australia: Australian Government

Publishing Service

Safir, H. (1998). The COMPSAT process. New York, NY: New York City Police

Department, Office of Management Analysis and Planning.

Sandy, A. (2009, July 21). The people who routinely pick up the pieces. The Courier

Mail. p.5.

Sarre, R. (1996). The state of community based policing in Australia: Some emerging

themes. In D. Chappell & P. Wilson (Eds). Australian Policing: Contemporary

Issues (2nd ed., pp. 26-41). Sydney, Australia: Butterworths,.

Seagrave, J. (1996). Defining community policing. American Journal of Police, 15(2),

1–22.

Shepherd, J. (1998). The circumstances and prevention of bar-glass injury [Editorial].

Addiction, 93(1), 5–7.

252

Sherman, L. W., Gottfresson, D., MacKenzie, D., Eck, J., Reuter, P., & Bushway, S.

(1997). Preventing crime: What works, what doesn’t, what’s promising. A

report to the United States Congress, prepared for the National Institute of

Justice. Retrieved from

http://www.rolim.com.br/2002/_pdfs/ing.pdf

Silverman, E. B. (1999). NYPD battles crime: Innovative strategies in policing. Boston,

MA: North-Eastern University Press.

Sinha, R., & Easton, C. (1999). Substance abuse and criminality. Journal of the

American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 27, 513–526.

Single, E. (1988). The availability theory of alcohol-related problems. In C. D.

Chaudron & D. A. Wilkinson (Eds.), Theories on alcoholism (pp. 325–351).

Toronto, Canada: Addiction Research Foundation.

Single, E., Ashley, M. J., Bondy, S., Dobbins, M., Rankin, J., & Rehm, J. (1999).

Evidence regarding the levels of alcohol consumption considered to be low-

risk for men and women. Canberra, Australia: Commonwealth Department of

Health and Aged Care.

Sparrow, M. (2000). The regulatory craft: Controlling risks, solving problems, and

managing compliance. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

Smith, D. A., & Klein, J. R. (1983). Police agency characteristics and arrest decisions.

In G. P. Whitaker & C. D. Phillips (Eds.), Evaluating performance of criminal

justice agencies. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Smith, K. L., Wiggers, J. H., Considine, R. J., Daly, J. B., & Collins, T. (2001) Police

knowledge and attitudes regarding crime, the responsible service of alcohol and

a proactive alcohol policing strategy. Drug and Alcohol Review, 20, 181–191.

Steenkamp, M., Harrison, J. E., & Allsop, A. (2002). Alcohol-related injuries and

young males (Injury Technical Paper No. 1). Canberra, Australia: Australian

Institute of Health and Welfare.

Stevenson R. National Alcohol Assessment, New Zealand Police, April 2009

http://www.police.govt.nz/resources/2009/Police-National-Alcohol-Assessment.pdf

Stewart, L. (1993). Police enforcement of liquor licensing laws: The UK experience.

Auckland, New Zealand: Alcohol and Public Health Research Unit, School of

Medicine, University of Auckland.

Stockwell, T. (1997). Regulation of the licensed drinking environment: A major

opportunity for crime prevention. In R. Homel (Ed.), Crime Prevention

253

Studies: Vol. 7. Policing for prevention: Reducing crime, public intoxication

and injury (pp. 7–34). Monsey, N.Y: Criminal Justice Press.

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (Eds.) (1997). Grounded Theory in Practice. Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage.

Strauss, A. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge, UK:

Cambridge University Press.

Tomsen, S. (1989, April). Alcohol, violent crime and social power. Paper presented at

the Alcohol and Crime Conference, Australian Institute of Criminology, Perth,

Australia.

Tomsen, S. (1997). A top night: Social protest, masculinity and the culture of drinking

violence. British Journal of Criminology, 37(1), 90–102.

Toomey, T., Jones-Webb, R., & Wagenaar, A. C. (1993). Policy – alcohol. Annual

Review of Addiction Research and Treatment, 3, 279–92

Van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action

sensitive pedagogy. New York: State University of New York Press.

Walker, M. (1983). Some problems in interpreting statistics relating to crime. Sheffield,

UK: University of Sheffield.

Wagenaar, C., & Wolfson, M. (1995). Deterring sales and provisions of alcohol to

minors: A study of enforcement in 295 countries in four states. Public Health

Reports, 110, 419–28.

Weisburd, D., & Neyroud, P. (2011). Police science: Toward a new paradigm. Papers

from the Harvard Executive Session on Policing and Public Safety. Retrieved

18 December 2012, from:

http://www.hks.harvard.edu/var/ezp_site/storage/fckeditor/file/pdfs/centers-

programs/programs/criminal-justice/NPIP-Police%20Science-

TowardaNewParadigm.pdf

Weisburd, D. (2008) Place-Based Policing. Ideas in American Policing No. 9, Police

Foundation, Washington D.C.

Wiggers, J. H., Jauncey, M., Consideine, R. J., Daly, J. B., Kingsland, M., Purss, K., …

Waites, J. (2004). Strategies and outcomes in translating alcohol harm

reduction research into practice: The Alcohol Linking Program. Drug and

Alcohol Review, 23, 355–65.

White, R., & Perrone, S. (2005). Crime and Social Control (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK:

Oxford University Press.

254

White, J., & Humeniuk, R. (1994). Alcohol misuse and violence: Exploring the

relationship. Canberra, Australia: Australian Government Publishing Service.

Williams, P. (1999). Trends and Issues in crime and criminal justice: No. 140. Alcohol-

related social disorder and rural youth: Part 1–victims. Canberra, Australia:

Australian Institute of Criminology.

Williams, P. (2000). Trends and Issues in crime and criminal justice: No. 149. Alcohol-

related social disorder and rural youth: Part 2–perpetrators. Canberra,

Australia: Australian Institute of Criminology.

Willner, P., & Hart, K. (2001). Adolescents’ reports of their illicit alcohol purchases.

Drugs: education, prevention & policy, 8(3), 233–42.

Willner, P. & Hart, K., Binmore, J., Cavendish, M. & Dunphy, E. (2000). Alcohol sales

to underage adolescents: an unobtrucive observational field study and

evaluation of a police intervention. Addiction, 95, pp. 1373-88.

Wilson, J. Q. (1968). Varieties of police behaviour. Cambridge, MA: Harvard

University Press.

Wilson, J. Q., & Kelling, G. L. (1982). Broken Windows: The police and

neighbourhood safety. The Atlantic Monthly, 243(1), 28–29.

Wilson, R. J. (1996). The social, psychological and offending characteristics of the

recidivist drink driver. Summary Proceedings: Drink Driving Recidivism

Summit, Adelaide. Adelaide, Australia: Department of Transport.

Wortley, R. (2001). A classification of techniques for controlling situational

precipitators of crime. Security Journal, 14, 63–82.

Wortley, R. (2003). Measuring police attitudes toward discretion. Criminal Justice and

Behavior, 30(5), 538–558.

Wortley, R., & Homel, R. (1995). Police prejudice as a function of training and out-

group contract: A longitudinal investigation. Law and Human Behavior, 19,

305–317.

255

APPENDICES

256

Appendix 1: Survey questionnaire (Study One)

Questionnaire

Policing Licensed Premises

In the Brisbane Central District

257

Purpose and scope of the

Questionnaire

This questionnaire relates to issues concerning the policing of licensed premises. It is part of broader research which attempts to answer questions concerning what is the optimum role of police in terms of reducing alcohol and other drug related harm in and around licensed premises. This research is centred on Brisbane Central District of Metropolitan North Region. Although the research is confined to this area it will have relevance in Queensland, nationally and internationally. The questionnaire is targeted at police officers only, irrespective of their current role. The survey is broken up into the following areas: Section 1 – Background information from participants Section 2 – Examines issues of alcohol and law enforcement Section 3 – Aims to determine participant knowledge Section 4 – Identifies the application of each strategy Section 5 – Examines the effectiveness of such strategies Section 6 – Relates to the various policing styles applied to given situations. The questionnaire is strictly confidential and anonymous. Your participation in this survey is voluntary. Please do not write your name or address on the questionnaire. The results of this survey and research generally will be made available at some future time. Thank you for taking the time to complete this questionnaire.

258

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

1. Your sex (male/female)? (Circle one number only)

Male.......................................................... 1 Female ...................................................... 2

2. Your age in years?................................. 3. (Circle one number only.)

Constable/Senior Constable....................1 Sergeant/Senior Sergeant........................2 Commissioned Officer............................3 Other....... ................................................4

4. Your role (list roles): (Circle one number only)

General Duties........................................ 1 Investigative (CIB/CPIU) ...................... 2 TCS/CDSU….. ...................................... 3 Intelligence……..................................... 4 Crime Prevention….. ............................. 5 LEAPS Unit…… ................................... 6 Other specialist area……....................... 7

5. Number of years in the Service…....................

ALCOHOL AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

6. In the Brisbane Central District (BCD) what proportion of incidents that police are called to or respond to, do you believe involves alcohol? (Circle

one number only)

None ...................................................1 Less than 25% ....................................2 25% to 49%........................................3 50% to 74%........................................4 75% to 99%........................................5 100% of the incidents.........................6

259

7. In your experience during the last six months, what proportion of the following types of incidents do you think involved alcohol? (Circle one number for each)

None 10

%

20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Disturbance in a private dwelling

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Street Disturbance

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Disturbance in a licensed premise

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Domestic 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Noise 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Assault 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Traffic Crash 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

8. In your experience to what degree does alcohol contribute to the complexity and difficulty of policing the following situations? (Circle one number for each)

Not at all

difficult

A little

difficult

Moderately

difficult

Substantiall

y difficult

Very

difficult

Disturbance in a private dwelling

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Street Disturbance 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Disturbance in a licensed premise

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Domestic 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Noise 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Assault 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Traffic Crash 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

260

9. In your experience, how much do the following locations increase the difficulty of

managing an alcohol-related incident? (Circle one number for each)

Does not

increase

difficulty at

all

Increases

difficulty

a little

Increases

difficulty

moderatel

y

Increases

difficulty

substantially

Increases

difficulty a

great deal

Inside Hotels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Inside Licensed clubs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Inside Licensed nightclubs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Around (not inside) licensed premises (Hotels/Nightclubs)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Major public entertainment venues such as sporting events, concerts, exhibitions/ shows

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Shopping malls 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Other public places (including parks, etc)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Private dwellings 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

YOU ARE ¼ OF THE WAY THERE

ALREADY!

261

10. In your experience, how much do the following factors increase the difficulty of

managing an alcohol-related incident? (Circle one number for each)

Does not

increase

difficulty at

all

Increases

difficulty a

little

Increases

difficulty

moderately

Increases

difficulty

substantially

Increases

difficulty a

great deal

There are spectators 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

The spectators are affected by alcohol 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Incident occurs in a public place 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

One or more people involved are mentally ill

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

One or more people involved are being aggressive

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

A drink driving related matter 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

One or more people involved are emotionally volatile

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

The people involved are juveniles (under 18 years)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

The people involved are aged between 18 and 40

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

The people are predominantly male 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

The people are predominantly female 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

One or more people involved require medical attention for an injury or physical illness

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

One or more people involved are Aborigines or Torres Strait Islanders

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

One or more people involved are Pacific Islanders

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

The people have cultural disadvantage and/or language barriers

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

The incident has occurred between the hours of 10 pm and 4 am

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

There is a victim who is also affected by alcohol

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

The incident involves an arrest 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

262

The people are also suspected of using illicit drugs

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

The people are overseas tourists/backpackers

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

11. What do you find are the most difficult situations (incidents and/or people) to manage if alcohol is involved and why do you find them the most difficult? (Please write in the space below)

12. How often have you attended to any type of incident in licensed premises over the past 6

months? (Circle one number only)

Never 1 - 5 6 - 10 11 - 15 16 - 20 Over 20

0 1 2 3 4 5

13. How often have you attended to any type of incident outside or around licensed premises over the

past 6 months? (Circle one number only)

Never 1 - 5 6 - 10 11 - 15 16 - 20 Over 20

0 1 2 3 4 5

14. What proportion of incidents that you have responded to in the past six months in and around

licensed premises have been initiated by you? (Such matters may be where you have decided to act in the absence of direction) (Circle one number only)

Doesn’t apply (non-operational).0 None ...........................................1 Less than 25% ............................2 25% to 49% ................................3 50% to 74% ................................4 75% to 99% ................................5 100% of the incidents .................6

263

15. What proportion of incidents that you have responded to in the past six months in and around

licensed premises have been initiated by other means? (Such matters may be where you have been tasked to respond by supervisors, communications, etc) (Circle one number only)

Doesn’t apply (non-operational)... 0 None ............................................. 1 Less than 25% .............................. 2 25% to 49% .................................. 3 50% to 74% .................................. 4 75% to 99% .................................. 5

100% of the incidents ................... 6 16. In your opinion what are the obstacles/barriers that prevent or make it difficult for you to police

licensed premises? (Please write in the space below)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

17. In the past six months have you reported any of the following offences against the Liquor Act?

(For each item circle 1=‘Yes’ or 2=‘No’) Yes No Unsure

Supplying liquor to unduly intoxicated minor or disorderly person ................................................................................................

Minor consuming liquor on premises.................................................

Falsely representing age of 18............................................................

Consume, remove, receive liquor outside trading hours ....................

Found drunk/disorderly or create a disturbance on licensed premises..............................................................................................

Sell liquor without license or permit........... ................................... as

Consuming alcohol in public place…….. ..........................................

Any other Liquor Act offence…….. ..................................................

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

3

3

3

3

3 3 3

18. Do you consider your knowledge of

the Liquor Act is…? (Circle one number only)

I have no knowledge of it ........................................... …1 I have little knowledge of the relevant sections............. 2 I have a fair knowledge of the relevant sections ........... 3 I have good knowledge of the relevant sections ............ 4 I have a very good knowledge of the relevant sections . 5

264

19. Do you think that the police should have…?

(Circle one number only)

Sole responsibility for enforcing the Liquor Act ...... 1 Shared responsibility for enforcing the Liquor Act .. 2 No responsibility for enforcing the Liquor Act ........ 3

20. In the past six months year have you been involved in Liquor Act enforcement operations?

(Circle one number only)

Yes ............................................................................ 1 No ............................................................................. 2

21. Do you consider your skills to effectively manage incidents inside licensed premises to be…? (Circle

one number only)

Very poor .................................................................. 1 Poor........................................................................... 2 Good ......................................................................... 3 Very good ................................................................. 4

22. Do you consider your skills to effectively manage an incident outside and around licensed premises to be…? (Circle one

number only)

Very poor .................................................................. 1 Poor........................................................................... 2 Good ......................................................................... 3 Very good ................................................................. 4

23. How would you describe the level of training you have received in responding to alcohol-related incidents inside licensed premises? (Circle one number only)

No training ................................................................ 1 Poor........................................................................... 2 Very poor .................................................................. 3 Good ......................................................................... 4 Very good ................................................................. 5

24. How did you acquire the knowledge to police inside licensed premises? (Please write in the space below)

1.__________________________________________________________________________

2.__________________________________________________________________________

3.__________________________________________________________________________

4.__________________________________________________________________________

5.__________________________________________________________________________

25. How would you describe the level of

training you have received in responding to alcohol-related incidents outside and around licensed premises? (Circle one

number only)

No training ................................................................ 1 Poor........................................................................... 2 Very poor .................................................................. 3 Good ......................................................................... 4 Very good ................................................................. 5

26. How did you acquire the knowledge to police outside and around licensed premises? (Please write in the space below)

1.__________________________________________________________________________ 2.__________________________________________________________________________ 3.__________________________________________________________________________ 4.__________________________________________________________________________ 5.__________________________________________________________________________

265

You are over ½ way!

KNOWLEDGE OF STRATEGIES

27. Please list those strategies which you believe are effective in reducing alcohol related harm

in licensed premises? (1=most effective…etc)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

266

28. Please list those strategies which you believe are effective in reducing alcohol related harm

outside and around licensed premises? (1=most effective…etc)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

267

APPLICATION OF STRATEGIES

PLEASE NOTE: It is important to the validity of the survey that you do not review your

response to earlier questions.

29. How effective do you think each of the following strategies will be in reducing drug and

alcohol-related incidents in and around licensed premises?

Not at all

effective

A little

effectiv

e

Moderat

ely

effective

Substantially

effective

Very

effective

Intensive uniform police presence and operations inside licensed premises

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Intensive uniform police presence and operations outside and around licensed premises

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Plain clothes (undercover) police monitoring of liquor license contraventions

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Responsible Service of alcohol

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Training bar staff and security to manage conflicts effectively

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Increased security at taxi ranks

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Improved food, entertainment and surroundings within licensed premises

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Close liaison between police, owners/operators and managers to encourage compliance with liquor laws

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Strict enforcement of liquor laws – arresting or prosecuting offenders

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Permit more self regulation by owner

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

268

operators and managers

More proactive audits by liquor licensing officers

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

RBT operations outside/near premises

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

30. How often have you used the following strategies in the previous 6 months? (Circle one

number for each item or circle “o” if you are non-operational) Non-

operational…………………………...0

Number of Occasions Never 1 - 5 6 – 10 11 - 15 16 - 20 Over 20

Liquor SETON 1 2 3 4 5 6

Release into custody of a family or friend

1 2 3 4 5 6

Take to a place of safety (eg. Diversion)

1 2 3 4 5 6

Take or send home (eg. Taxi)

1 2 3 4 5 6

Tip out alcohol in public places

1 2 3 4 5 6

Take to hospital 1 2 3 4 5 6

Take no action 1 2 3 4 5 6

269

31. How important do you think the following skills are when dealing with incidents involving

alcohol in and around licensed premises? (Circle one number for each)

Not at all

importan

t

A little

importan

t

Fairly

importan

t

Substantiall

y important

Essential

Self-restraint 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Considering alternative actions

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Listening 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Displaying empathy 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Maintaining control of the situation

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Talking to calm the person down

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Explaining rather than giving orders

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Identifying and isolating the ring leader

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Removing the person for their own safety

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Decisiveness in taking action 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

To move the person on 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Giving orders 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Demonstrating knowledge of the Law

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

270

EFFECTIVENESS OF STRATEGIES

32. Based upon your experience, what effect does the 3a.m. lockout provisions had in terms of

public safety through contributing to reductions in alcohol-related harm? (Circle one

number only)

Major Negative

Impact

Some

Negative

Impact

No Impact Some Positive

Impact

Major Positive

Impact

1 2 3 4 5

33. How effective do you believe the following partners/stakeholders are in terms of addressing

alcohol-related harm in and around licensed premises? (Circle one number only for each)

Not at all

Effective

A little

Effective

Fairly

Effective

Very

Effective

Extremel

y

Effective

Liquor Licensing 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Brisbane City Council 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Queensland Health 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Queensland Fire and Rescue Service

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Queensland Ambulance Service

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Licensees 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Security Providers 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

34. How sufficient do you consider your police powers are to effectively manage alcohol-

incidents inside licensed premises? (Circle one number only)

Insufficient ........................................................1 Somewhat sufficient ..........................................2 Fairly satisfied ...................................................3 Sufficient ...........................................................4 Very sufficient ...................................................5

271

35. How sufficient do you consider your police powers are to effectively manage alcohol-

incidents outside and around licensed premises? (Circle one number only)

Insufficient ........................................................1 Somewhat sufficient ..........................................2 Fairly satisfied ...................................................3 Sufficient ...........................................................4 Very sufficient ...................................................5

You are over ¾ of the way completed…well done!

POLICING STYLES

36. Please rate how much you agree with the following statements. (Circle one number for

each)

Strongly

Disagree Disagree

Neither

Agree

nor

Disagree

Agree Strongly

Agree

Police who choose not to arrest some offenders are shirking their responsibility

1 2 3 4 5

Police need to exercise judgement about whether arrest is the best solution even when they are certain that technically an offence has been committed

1 2 3 4 5

Often a caution to an offender by a police officer can do more good than an arrest

1 2 3 4 5

The law is the law: police can make no exceptions

1 2 3 4 5

If police don’t arrest people for minor offences, it will only encourage more serious crime

1 2 3 4 5

It is the duty of police to arrest all offenders without fear or favour

1 2 3 4 5

272

Sometimes the best way for police to keep things running smoothly is to turn a blind eye to some offences

1 2 3 4 5

An offender should expect no leniency from the police no matter what the circumstances of the offence

1 2 3 4 5

A police officer cannot let compassion get in the way of enforcing the law

1 2 3 4 5

It is better for police to deal with some offences informally rather than make an arrest

1 2 3 4 5

The good police officer is always on the lookout for an arrest

1 2 3 4 5

It is the police officer’s job to enforce the law “by the book”

1 2 3 4 5

Most offenders will regard a caution as a sign of weakness on the part of a police officer

1 2 3 4 5

The first thing a police officer learns is that the law cannot be regarded as black and white

1 2 3 4 5

Often police can intervene to solve a dispute without having to make an arrest

1 2 3 4 5

Many complaints from the public are too unimportant for police to worry about

1 2 3 4 5

Sometimes for a police officer to make an arrest will cause him more trouble than it is worth

1 2 3 4 5

The only way for police to get respect is to get tough with offenders

1 2 3 4 5

Police should just ignore minor offences so that they can devote their time to really important offences

1 2 3 4 5

Police should just enforce the law: dealing with people’s problems is a job for social workers

1 2 3 4 5

Unless police come down hard on offenders things will quickly get out of hand

1 2 3 4 5

When it comes to making an arrest, skilful 1 2 3 4 5

273

police know when to mind their own business and not complicate matters

What police need are tougher laws and more powers to deal with young trouble makers

1 2 3 4 5

The best police officers are those who get out and make the most arrests

1 2 3 4 5

It is better for police not to get involved in disputes among families and friends

1 2 3 4 5

Policing Aboriginal and ethnic groups require very different approaches to that of policing other communities

1 2 3 4 5

If more juveniles were simply cautioned by police they would be less likely to become hardened criminals

1 2 3 4 5

It is important for police to consider the spirit of the law before deciding to make an arrest

1 2 3 4 5

The expectation of the community is important in deciding the action to be taken

1 2 3 4 5

The media drives the police response in terms of dealing with alcohol problems

1 2 3 4 5

274

37. To what degree does the following restrict or constrain you from policing licensed

premises? (Circle one number only for each)

No Barrier Some

Barrier

Major

Barrier

Your knowledge of legislation 1 2 3 4 5

Your knowledge of policy 1 2 3 4 5

Existence of strong legislation 1 2 3 4 5

Existence of strong service policy

1 2 3 4 5

Knowledge of effective policing strategies

1 2 3 4 5

Organisational support for policing licensed premises

1 2 3 4 5

Support by managers/supervisors

1 2 3 4 5

Level of training 1 2 3 4 5

On the job experience 1 2 3 4 5

Safety for police in licensed premises

1 2 3 4 5

Police support (back up) 1 2 3 4 5

Physical resources 1 2 3 4 5

Time (competing interest) 1 2 3 4 5

Please list other barriers which constrain you from policing licensed premises?

275

38. For you to give policing licensed premises greater prominence which of the following do you consider would have to occur? (Circle one number for each)

Strongly

Disagree Disagree

Neither

Agree

nor

Disagree

Agree Strongly

Agree

Stronger laws enhanced 1 2 3 4 5

Better service policy 1 2 3 4 5

Stronger mandate from the Executive of the service

1 2 3 4 5

More support from supervisors/Senior managers

1 2 3 4 5

Better training 1 2 3 4 5

More commitment from other stakeholders (external of service)

1 2 3 4 5

Better supervision 1 2 3 4 5

Better and more back up 1 2 3 4 5

Safer environment within licensed premises 1 2 3 4 5

More time 1 2 3 4 5

More support from Government 1 2 3 4 5

THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP!

276

Appendix 2 Questionnaire and table of data instrument sources

Survey Theme Survey Item - Question Method – Recording Response Item/Question Source

Demographic information

1. Your sex (male/female)? Demographic recording – ‘Male’ 1 or ‘Female’ 2.

General demographic question

2. Your age in years? Demographic – written in years. General demographic question

3. Rank? Demographic – three ranks provided and provision for ‘other’.

General demographic question

4. Your role? Demographic – seven options provided in a comprehensive list of areas.

General demographic question

5. Number of years in Service? Demographic – written in years. General demographic question

Alcohol and law enforcement

6. In the BCD what proportion of incidents that police are called to or respond to, do you believe involve alcohol?

Quantitative questioning – utilising a range of responses provided and recorded against six categories directly related to percentages.

New Question however, informed by Mason, G. & Wilson, P.R. (1992); Single et al., (1998); Arro et al., 1992; Davey & French, (1998); Ireland & Thommeny, (1993)

7. In your experience during the last six months, what proportion of the following types of incidents do you think involve alcohol?

Quantitative questioning – utilising a range of responses provided and recorded against a ten-point Likert scale.

Informed by Findlay et al., (2000) and further relevant to Mason, G. & Wilson, P.R. (1992); Single et al., (1998); Arro et al., 1992; Davey & French, (1998); Ireland & Thommeny, (1993)

8. In your experience to what degree does alcohol contributes to the complexity and difficulty of policing the following situations?

Quantitative questioning – utilising a range of responses provided and recorded against a ten-point Likert scale.

This question has been taken from Findlay et al., (2000) with adaptations for the contemporary Queensland context.

9. In your experience, how much do the following locations increase the difficulty of managing an alcohol-related incident?

Quantitative questioning – utilising a range of responses provided and recorded against a ten-point Likert scale.

This question has been taken from Findlay et al., (2000) with adaptations for the contemporary Queensland context.

10. In your experience, how much do the following factors increase the difficulty of managing an alcohol-related incident?

Quantitative questioning – utilising a range of responses provided and recorded against a ten-point Likert scale.

This question has been taken from Findlay et al., (2000) with adaptations for the contemporary Queensland context.

11. What do you find are the most difficult situations (incidents/or people) to manage if alcohol is involved and why do you find them the most difficult?

Qualitative questioning – provision for open-ended response

This question is informed by Findlay et al., (2000), however, is designed to elicit a qualitative response. This therefore is a new question.

277

Survey Theme Survey Item - Question Method – Recording Response Item/Question Source

12. How often have you attended to any type of incident in licensed premises over the past 6 months?

Quantitative questioning –grouped responses based on number – six-point Likert scale

New questions – designed to ascertain experience inside licensed premises

13. How often have you attended to any type of incident outside and around licensed premises over the past 6 months?

Quantitative questioning – provision of grouped responses based on number – six-point Likert scale

New question –designed to ascertain experience outside and around licensed premises.

14. What proportion of incidents that you have responded to in and around licensed premises have been initiated by you?

Quantitative questioning – utilising a range of responses provided and recorded against six categories directly related to percentages.

New question – designed to ascertain initiation to licensed premises-type situations.

15. What proportion of incidents that you have responded to in and around licensed premises have been initiated by other means?

Quantitative questioning – utilising a range of responses provided and recorded against six categories directly related to percentages.

New question – designed to ascertain initiation to the environs outside and around licensed premises.

16. In your option what are the obstacles/barriers that prevent or make it difficult for you to police licensed premises?

Qualitative questioning – open-ended responses required with facility for up to five responses.

New question but informed by Smith et al., (2001); Barton, A. & Evans, R. (1999)

17. Have you reported any of the following offences against the Liquor Act?

Quantitative questioning – range of responses provided and ‘Yes’, ‘No” or ‘Unsure’ provision for responses.

New question however, has been informed by Smith et al., (2001); Findlay et al., (2002); & Doherty & Roche (2003)

18. Do you consider your knowledge of the Liquor Act is…?

Quantitative questioning – five responses provided.

New question however, has been informed by Smith et al., (2001)

19. Do you think police should ...? Quantitative questioning – three responses around responsibilities

New question however, has been informed by Smith et al., (2001)

20. Have you been involved in Liquor Act enforcement operations?

Quantitative questioning – two responses provided – “Yes’ or ‘No’.

New question however, has been informed by Doherty & Roche (2003)

21. Do you consider your skills to effectively manage incidents inside licensed premises to be…?

Quantitative questioning –range of responses provided and recorded against four states.

New question however, has been informed by Smith et al., (2001)

22. Do you consider your skills to effectively manage incidents outside and around licensed premises to be…?

Quantitative questioning – utilising a range of responses provided and recorded against four states.

New question however, has been informed by Smith et al., (2001)

23. How would you describe the level of training you have received in responding to alcohol-related incidents inside licensed premises?

Quantitative questioning – utilising a range of responses provided and recorded against five states

New question however, has been informed by Middleton, A. (1992) & MRL Research Group (1993) & Smith et al., (2001)

278

Survey Theme Survey Item - Question Method – Recording Response Item/Question Source

24. How did you acquire the knowledge to police inside licensed premises?

Qualitative questioning – open-ended responses required with facility for up to five responses.

New question however, has been informed by Smith et al., (2001)

25. How would you describe the level of training you have received in responding to alcohol-related incidents outside and around licensed premises?

Quantitative questioning – utilising a range of responses provided and recorded against five states

New question however, has been informed by Middleton, A. (1992) & MRL Research Group (1993) & Smith et al., (2001)

26. How did you acquire the knowledge to police inside licensed premises?

Qualitative questioning – open-ended responses required with facility for up to five responses.

New question however, has been informed by Smith et al., (2001)

Knowledge of strategies

27. List those strategies which you believe are effective in reducing alcohol-related in licensed premises?

Qualitative questioning – open-ended responses required with facility for up to ten responses.

New question however, has been informed by Doherty & Roche (2003)

28. List those strategies which you believe are effective in reducing alcohol-related outside and around licensed premises?

Qualitative questioning – open-ended responses required with facility for up to ten responses.

New question however, has been informed by Doherty & Roche (2003)

Application of strategies

29. How effective do you think each of the following strategies will be in reducing drug and alcohol-related incidents in and around licensed premises?

Quantitative questioning – provision of numerous responses – responses recorded on ten-point Likert scale

New question however, has been informed by Smith et al., (2001) & Doherty & Roche (2003)

30. How often have you used the following strategies in the previous 6 months?

Quantitative questioning – provision of numerous responses – responses recorded on ten-point Likert scale

This question has been taken from Findlay et al., (2000), but with adaptations for the contemporary Queensland context.

31. How important do you think the following skills are when dealing with incidents involving alcohol in and around licensed premises?

Quantitative questioning – utilising a range of responses provided and responses against a 10-point Likert scale

New question however, has been informed by Smith et al., (2001)

Effectiveness of Strategies

32. Based upon your experience, what effect does the 3am lockout provisions had in terms of public safety through contributing to reductions in alcohol-related harm?

Quantitative questioning – utilising a range of responses provided and responses against a 5-point Likert scale.

New question however, has been informed by Palk et al., (2007a) and supported by the later research of Mazerolle et al., (2012).

33. How effective do you believe the following partners/stakeholders are in terms of addressing alcohol-related harm in and around license premises?

Quantitative questioning – responses recorded on a 10-point Likert scale.

New question however, has been informed by Doherty & Roche (2003)

34. How sufficient do you believe the following partners/stakeholders are in terms of addressing alcohol-related harm inside licensed premises?

Quantitative questioning – utilising a range of responses provided and responses against a 10-point Likert scale.

New question however, has been informed by Doherty & Roche (2003)

279

Survey Theme Survey Item - Question Method – Recording Response Item/Question Source

35. How sufficient do you believe the following partners/stakeholders are in terms of addressing alcohol-related harm outside and around licensed premises?

Quantitative questioning – utilising a range of responses provided and responses against a 10-point Likert scale.

New question however, has been informed by Doherty & Roche (2003)

Policing Styles 36. Please rate how much you agree with the following statements?

Quantitative questioning – utilising a range of responses provided and responses against a 5-point Likert scale

This question has been taken from Wortley (2003) and utilises the same Likert scale. The question is also informed by Smith et al., (2001). The question was also subject to minor changes due to the focus testing regime and to cater for the contemporary Queensland policing context.

37. To what degree does the following restrict or constrain you from policing licensed premises?

Quantitative questioning – utilising a range of responses provided and responses against a 5-point Likert scale.

New question however, has been informed by Smith et al., (2001); Barton, A. & Evans, R. (1999)

38 For you to give policing licensed premises greater prominence which of the following do you consider would have to occur?

Quantitative questioning – utilising a range of responses provided and responses against a 5-point Likert scale.

New question however, informed by Smith et al., (2001); Barton, A. & Evans, R. (1999)

References: Barton, A. & Evans, R. (1999) Proactive policing on Merseyside – Police Research Series paper 105. London, UK: Crown Publishing, 1999. Findlay, R.A., Sheehan, M.C., Davey, J., Brodie, H., & Rynne, F. (2000) Managing alcohol-related incidents: Perceptions of police officers. International Journal of Police

Science and Management, Vol. 3, No. 1. 2000. Findlay, R.A., Sheehan, M.C., Davey, J., Brodie, H., & Rynne, F. (2002) Liquor Law Enforcement: policy and practice in Australia. Drugs: education, prevention and

policy, Vol. 9, No. 1, 2002. Mason, G. & Wilson, P.R. Alcohol and crime. In: Wilson, P.R., ed. Issues in crime morality and justice. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, 1992: 145-58 Middleton, A. Police perceptions and attitudes in Victoria. Victoria, Australia: Methods and Applied Research Unit, Victoria Police Service, 1992. MRL Research Group. (1993). Attitudes towards the strategic plan among police staff. (research report) Wellington: MRL Research Group 1993. Single, E., Robson, L., Xie, .& Rehm, J. (1998). The economic costs of alcohol, tobacco and illicit drugs in Canada, 1992 Addiction 1998; 93:991-1006 Smith, K.L., Wiggers, J.H., Considine, R.J., Daly, J.B. & Collins, T. (2001) Police knowledge and attitudes regarding crime, the responsible service of alcohol and a

proactive alcohol policing strategy. Drug and Alcohol Review 20, 181-191. Wortley, R. (2003) Measuring police attitudes toward discretion. Criminal Justice and Behaviour, Vol. 30 No. 5, October 2003 538-558

280

Appendix 3: Internal QPS interview script (Study Two)

INTERNAL QPS INTERVIEWS

POLICING LICENSED PREMISES IN

THE BRISBANE CENTRAL DISTRICT

INTRODUCTION – PURPOSE

To the participant, Thank you for taking the time to participate in this research. Your participation and opinions provided in this discussion today are considered valuable to creating a better understanding of the context in which police undertake their role in reducing alcohol and other drug-related harm through policing licensed premises. This study will conduct a series of interviews across the Queensland Police Service with key personnel to examine the roles Queensland police presently play in addressing alcohol and other-drug related harm in and around licensed premises. The study will also examine strategies that can be used achieve optimal results in the future for the Queensland Police Service. The Principal Researcher for this project is Assistant Commissioner Peter Martin, Ethical Standards Command who is undertaking this research as part of his PhD requirements from the Queensland University of Technology. It is important to note that the interviews are not being conducted on behalf of the Queensland Police Service however your anonymous comments gathered in these interviews will contribute to developing recommendations for improving the environment in which officers work within. Due to ethical and methodological reasons the interviews will be conducted by Dr Angela Wallace on behalf of Assistant Commissioner Peter Martin. The results of the interviews will be coded and no individual will be identified as part of the write up of the results. If you have any concerns with participation please feel free to contact Assistant Commissioner Martin on 0417764882. The outcomes of the project will be extremely important to law enforcement both here in Australia and overseas. There is scant information with respect to the attitudes and practices of police officers in this important context (policing licensed premises). Your participation is completely voluntary and you may at any time choose to not answer a question or cease participation at any time of the interview with no personal consequences. The interview should be completed within 1 hour. At the end of the interview please feel free to ask any questions in relation to your participation in the study. Thank you for your invaluable contribution

281

Demographic Information

• Rank:

• Position:

• Role:

• How long have you held this role? Organisational Expectation

• What do you understand is the QPS role with respect to policing licensed premises?

• What do you believe is the Queensland government’s expectation with respect to policing licensed premises?

• What is the QPS expectation of officers with respect to policing licensed premises?

• Is the organisational expectation documented anywhere? If so, what is it and where is it documented?

• What is your role with respect to policing licensed premises?

• What is your personal vision with respect to policing licensed premises?

• Have you communicated to personnel under your control what you want to achieve concerning the policing of licensed premises?

• How have you done this (communicated your personal vision) and how often have you done this in the preceding 12 months?

• Do you believe that officers have clarity in terms of the organisational expectation with respect to policing licensed premises?

Police Role – Knowledge and Skills

• To what extent to you believe that police officers have a clear understanding of their

role with respect to the policing of licensed premises?

• To what extent to you believe police officers are equipped with the requisite knowledge, skills and attitudes to undertake effective policing of licensed premises?

• To what extent do police have the capability to influence positively (reduce alcohol-related harms) or negatively (increase such harms), public safety in and around licensed premises?

282

• What do you believe are the barriers to police officers taking a more active role in policing licensed premises?

• What do you believe could be done to encourage police officers to be more active in the policing of licensed premises?

• What strategies would you like to see police officers using more of with respect to the policing in and around licensed premises?

• What are the advantages of using such strategies (that you have nominated in the previous question)?

Partnerships/Collaboration

• Who are the main partners (government and non-government) in addressing issues in licensed premises?

• To what degree do these partners meet their obligations and what is their effectiveness in making licensed premises safe?

• Are there any other comments you wish to make?

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION

283

Appendix 4: Information sheet for internal QPS

interviews (Study Two)

Policing Licensed Premises in the Brisbane Central District

Executive Police Interviews Executive Police Interviews Executive Police Interviews Executive Police Interviews

INFORMATION SHEETINFORMATION SHEETINFORMATION SHEETINFORMATION SHEET

Project Leader PhD Student Research Fellow

Professor Jeremy Davey Centre for Accident Research and Road Safety – Queensland Q.U.T. Tel: 07 3138 4574 j.davey@qut.edu.au

Mr Peter Martin APM Assistant Commissioner Ethical Standards Command Q’ld Police Service Tel: 3364 3798 Martin.PeterJ@police.qld.gov.au

Dr. Angela Wallace Centre for Accident Research and Road Safety – Queensland Q.U.T. Tel: 0402 240 234 angela.wallace@qut.edu.au

The Centre for Accident Research & Road Safety – Queensland (CARRS-Q) based at the Queensland University of Technology is undertaking a project examining policing of licensed premises in the Brisbane Central District. This project is being undertaken as part of Assistant Commissioner Peter Martin’s (Ethical Standards Command) Doctor of Philosophy studies. The purpose of these interviews

is to examine the optimum role for police in addressing alcohol and other-drug related harm in and

around licences premises. The outcome of this project will be extremely important to law

enforcement both in Australia and overseas.

Interviews with police personnel are being conducted by Dr. Angela Wallace during October/November 2008 to gain an appreciation of the management and leadership environment that exists within which individual officers operate. The Commissioner of Police and the QPS Research Committee have supported this research (04/00625). You have been identified as a key stakeholder and we are seeking your participation in this project. The interview will take approximately 1 hr and notes will be taken to assist with identifying themes. All documentation will be destroyed once the project is completed. Dr. Angela Wallace will be conducting the interview and will ensure that any identifying information is removed and responses coded before they are returned to Assistant Commissioner Peter Martin. This will ensure your complete confidentiality.

Your participation is strictly voluntary and your confidentiality is assured. You may choose not to answer a question or cease participation of the interview at anytime during the interview. All comments and responses are anonymous and will be treated confidentially. The names of individual persons are not required in any of the responses. Due to the nature of the project, a verbal consent mechanism will be used. Any data collected from you will be unidentifiable and purely for research purposes. There are no risks beyond normal day-to-day living associated with your participation in this project. There are no direct benefits by participating in this study. However, you will be assisting with research into policing licensed premises which will advance understanding of a very important area.

QUT provides for limited free counselling for research participants of QUT projects who may experience some distress as a result of their participation in the research. Should you wish to access this service please contact the Clinic Receptionist of the QUT Psychology Clinic on 3138 4578. Please indicate to the receptionist that you are a research participant. Alternatively, the Queensland Police Service offers free counselling to any of its staff members. If you wish to access this service please contact the Human Services Officer at Police Headquarters on 3364 6464.

Please contact any of the research team named above if you have any questions or if you require further information about the project. QUT is committed to researcher integrity and the ethical conduct of research projects. However, if you do have any concerns or complaints about the ethical conduct of the project you may contact the QUT Research Ethics Officer on 3138 2340 or ethicscontact@qut.edu.au. The Research Ethics Officer is not connected with the research project and can facilitate a resolution to your concern in an impartial manner.

284

Appendix 5: External stakeholder interview script

(Study Three)

EXTERNAL STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS

POLICING LICENSED PREMISES IN THE

BRISBANE CENTRAL DISTRICT

INTRODUCTION - PURPOSE

To the participant,

Thank you for taking the time to participate in this research. Your participation and opinions provided in this discussion today are considered valuable to creating a better understanding of the context in which police undertake their role in reducing alcohol and other drug-related harm through policing licensed premises. This study will conduct a series of interviews across the Queensland Police Service with key personnel to examine the roles Queensland police presently play in addressing alcohol and other-drug related harm in and around licensed premises. The study will also examine strategies that can be used achieve optimal results in the future for the Queensland Police Service. The Principal Researcher for this project is Assistant Commissioner Peter Martin, who is undertaking this research as part of his PhD requirements from the Queensland University of Technology. It is important to note that the interviews are not being conducted on behalf of the Queensland Police Service however your anonymous comments gathered in these interviews will contribute to developing recommendations for improving the environment in which officers work within. Due to ethical and methodological reasons the interviews will be conducted by Dr Angela Wallace on behalf of Assistant Commissioner Peter Martin. The results of the interviews will be coded and no individual will be identified as part of the write up of the results. If you have any concerns with participation please feel free to contact Assistant Commissioner Martin on 0417764882. The outcomes of the project will be extremely important to law enforcement both here in Australia and overseas. There is scant information with respect to the attitudes and practices of police officers in this important context (policing licensed premises). Your participation is completely voluntary and you may at any time choose to not answer a question or cease participation at any time of the interview with no personal consequences. The interview should be completed within 1 hour. At the end of the interview please feel free to ask any questions in relation to your participation in the study. Thank you for your invaluable contribution

285

Demographic Information

• Employer/Company/Institution & Position:

• Role (Brief outline of what this role entails):

• How long have you held this role?

• What is [state the name of the organisation] role in terms of licensed premises? Organisational Expectation

• What do you understand is the QPS role with respect to policing licensed premises?

• What do you believe is the Queensland government’s expectation with respect to policing licensed premises?

• What do you believe is the QPS expectation of officers with respect to policing licensed premises?

• What has been your interaction with police specifically, relating to licensed premises?

• Do you have a role with respect to addressing alcohol-related issues in and around licensed premises? If so, what is your personal vision with respect to such activities?

• Have you had an opportunity to speak to police about licensed premises environment/s? If so, how many times in the past 12 months have you done this?

Police Role – Knowledge and Skills

• To what extent do you believe that police officers have a clear understanding of their role with respect to the policing of licensed premises?

• To what extent do you believe police officers are equipped with the requisite knowledge, skills and attitudes to undertake effective policing of licensed premises?

• To what extent do police have the capability to influence positively (reduce alcohol-related harms) or negatively (increase such harms), public safety in and around licensed premises? (How would you describe the effectiveness of police?)

• What do you believe are the barriers to police officers taking a more active role in policing licensed premises?

• What do you believe could be done to encourage police officers to be more active in the policing of licensed premises?

• What strategies would you like to see police officers using more of with respect to the policing in and around licensed premises?

286

• What are the advantages of using such strategies (that you have nominated in the previous question)?

• What strategies would you like to see police using less of with respect to policing licensed premises? Why?

Partnerships/Intersectoral Collaboration

• Who are the main partners (government and non-government) in addressing issues in licensed premises?

• To what degree do these partners meet their obligations and what is their effectiveness in making licensed premises safe?

• Do you believe a partnership between you and your organisation and police is important in addressing alcohol-related problems in and around licensed premises?

• Are there any other comments you wish to make?

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION

287

Appendix 6: Information sheet for external stakeholder

interviews (Study Three)

Policing Licensed Premises in the Brisbane Central District

External Stakeholder Interviews External Stakeholder Interviews External Stakeholder Interviews External Stakeholder Interviews

INFORMATION SHEETINFORMATION SHEETINFORMATION SHEETINFORMATION SHEET

Project Leader PhD Student Research Fellow

Professor Jeremy Davey Centre for Accident Research and Road Safety – Queensland Q.U.T. Tel: 07 3138 4574 j.davey@qut.edu.au

Mr Peter Martin APM Assistant Commissioner Ethical Standards Command Q’ld Police Service Tel: 3364 3798 Martin.PeterJ@police.qld.gov.au

Dr. Angela Wallace Centre for Accident Research and Road Safety – Queensland Q.U.T. Tel: 0402 240 234 angela.wallace@qut.edu.au

The Centre for Accident Research & Road Safety – Queensland (CARRS-Q) based at the Queensland University of Technology is undertaking a project examining policing of licensed premises in the Brisbane Central District. This project is being undertaken as part of Assistant Commissioner Peter Martin’s (Ethical Standards Command) Doctor of Philosophy studies. The

purpose of these interviews is to examine the optimum role for police in addressing alcohol

and other-drug related harm in and around licences premises. The outcome of this project will

be extremely important to law enforcement both in Australia and overseas.

Interviews with stakeholders are being conducted by Dr. Angela Wallace during November/December 2008 to gain an appreciation of the management of licensed premises. You have been identified as a key stakeholder and we are seeking your participation in this project. The interview will take approximately 1 hr and notes will be taken to assist with identifying themes. All documentation will be destroyed once the project is completed. Dr. Angela Wallace will be conducting the interview and will ensure that any identifying information is removed and responses coded before they are returned to Assistant Commissioner Peter Martin. This will ensure your complete confidentiality.

Your participation is strictly voluntary and your confidentiality is assured. You may choose not to answer a question or cease participation of the interview at anytime during the interview. All comments and responses are anonymous and will be treated confidentially. The names of individual persons are not required in any of the responses. Due to the nature of the project, a verbal consent mechanism will be used. Any data collected from you will be unidentifiable and purely for research purposes. There are no risks beyond normal day-to-day living associated with your participation in this project. There are no direct benefits by participating in this study. However, you will be assisting with research into policing licensed premises which will advance understanding of a very important area.

QUT provides for limited free counselling for research participants of QUT projects who may experience some distress as a result of their participation in the research. Should you wish to access this service please contact the Clinic Receptionist of the QUT Psychology Clinic on 3138 4578.

Please contact any of the research team named above if you have any questions or if you require further information about the project. QUT is committed to researcher integrity and the ethical conduct of research projects. However, if you do have any concerns or complaints about the ethical conduct of the project you may contact the QUT Research Ethics Officer on 3138 2340 or ethicscontact@qut.edu.au. The Research Ethics Officer is not connected with the research project and can facilitate a resolution to your concern in an impartial manner.

288

Appendix 7: Twenty-five techniques of situational crime

prevention

Below are the updated 'Twenty-five Techniques of Situational Crime Prevention' by Cornish and Clarke (2003). Each technique has two examples listed with it.

Increase the effort Increase the risks Reduce the

rewards Reduce

provocations Remove the

excuses

1. Harden Targets

immobilisers in cars

anti-robbery screens

6. Extend

guardianship

cocooning

neighbourhood watch

11. Conceal

targets

gender-neutral phone directories

off-street parking

16. Reduce

frustration and

stress

efficient queuing

soothing lighting

21. Set rules

rental agreements

hotel registration

2. Control access

to facilities

alley-gating

entry phones

7. Assist natural

surveillance

improved street lighting

neighbourhood watch hotlines

12. Remove

targets

removable car radios

pre-paid public phone cards

17. Avoid disputes

fixed cab fares

reduce crowding in pubs

22. Post

instructions

'No parking'

'Private property'

3. Screen exits

tickets needed

electronic tags for libraries

8. Reduce

anonymity

taxi driver ID's

'how's my driving?' signs

13. Identify

property

property marking

vehicle licensing

18. Reduce

emotional arousal

controls on violent porn

prohibit paedophiles working with children

23. Alert

conscience

roadside speed display signs

'shoplifting is stealing'

4. Deflect

offenders

street closures in red light District

separate toilets for women

9. Utilise place

managers

train employees to prevent crime

support whistle blowers

14. Disrupt

markets

checks on pawn brokers

licensed street vendors

19. Neutralise peer

pressure

'idiots drink and drive'

'it's ok to say no'

24. Assist

compliance

litter bins

public lavatories

5. Control

tools/weapons

toughened beer glasses

photos on credit cards

10. Strengthen

formal surveillance

speed cameras

CCTV in town centres

15. Deny benefits

ink merchandise tags

graffiti cleaning

20. Discourage

imitation

rapid vandalism repair

V-chips in TV's

25. Control

drugs /alcohol

breathalysers in pubs

alcohol-free events