• Specific Year
    Any

Youth Affairs Council of Western Australia --- "Curfews: The Public Fight for Young People to be in the City" [2003] IndigLawB 55; (2003) 5(27) Indigenous Law Bulletin 8


Curfews:



The Public Fight for Young People to be in the City

by the Youth Affairs Council of Western Australia

Young people on the streets of inner city Perth have been targeted by policies of surveillance and removal for decades. Respected veteran youth worker Reverend George Davies has identified these key polices as:

  • The introduction of surveillance cameras in 1989
  • Operation Sweep, an aggressive and targeted application of section 138B of the Child Welfare Act 1947
  • Operation Family Values (low key continuation of Operation Sweep)
  • Introduction and subsequent growth of railway policing, special transit police and confrontational approaches by police officers.
  • Young People in Northbridge Policy

Western Australia has the Child Welfare Act 1947 (‘the Act’). Section 138B has provided police with a legal basis to remove young people from the streets of inner city Perth. Under the Act, if a police officer has reason to believe that a child is away from their usual place of residence and is not under the immediate supervision of a parent or responsible person, or in the police officer’s opinion the child is in physical or moral danger, misbehaving or truanting from school then the police officer is empowered to detain the child in custody. Curfew policies merely direct the police to focus their human and physical resources on the application of Section 138B in specific geographical areas.

Research into curfews indicates that they are an ineffective and unfair method of reducing crime. The Youth Affairs Council of WA (‘YACWA’) has opposed curfew policies primarily because such policies label all young people regardless of their behaviour as criminal or potentially criminal, threatening or potentially threatening and not to be trusted. Curfew policies reinforce negative perceptions and beliefs of police regarding young people, and young people’s perceptions of police. They have little regard for actual crime statistics or why young people may be on the streets. Curfew policies criminalize non-criminal behaviour.

The Western Australian Government’s ‘Young People in Northbridge Policy’ is a policy of the Office of Crime Prevention, which sits within the Department of the Premier and Cabinet. It describes Northbridge as the city’s largest adult entertainment precinct and describes the process of urban renewal that the area has been undergoing. It then clearly associates the decrease in vibrancy and vitality of the precinct with the increasing numbers of young people:

The area has developed a reputation for unacceptable levels of violent, aggressive and generally anti-social behaviour. In recent times, it has also become the destination for large numbers of children and young people.

The policy then describes which children will be targeted and when the policy applies.

The Young People in Northbridge Policy was made public via a leaked story in the West Australian newspaper in June 2003. No direct consultation or discussion had occurred with agencies working in the inner city area or with young people frequenting the inner city about how to address the issues of young people in Northbridge.

The policy was presented as a thoughtful, well planned, welfare intervention and the ensuing letters to the editor and talk back radio calls demonstrated public support for the policy. The YACWA took an immediate and public stance against the policy and was subsequently labeled as ‘not caring for young people’ and ‘caring more for their rights than their welfare’. The Treasurer made a veiled threat at our funding, saying in a media conference that we should focus less on this distraction and get on with the core business that we are funded to do.

Beyond the actual policy, YACWA was concerned that the government had made no provisions to inform young people of their new responsibilities under the policy. To date, young people have only found out about the curfew policy when they are picked up by police or are informed of the policy via youth workers working in the inner city.

YACWA has been the public face of the campaign against the curfew. After holding a number of meetings with inner city agencies, young people and other people directly impacted by the policy, YACWA adopted the following key principles to guide its lobbying and advocacy work:

  • Research indicates that curfews don’t work
  • Curfews demonize all young people
  • Curfews criminalize welfare issues
  • The police already have section 138B of the Act.

YACWA used these principles in partnership with real stories from the streets of Northbridge. Other agencies and groups have been encouraged and assisted to lobby from other angles, including advocating for more youth spaces in the city and applying for research funds to conduct action research into the real issues facing young people in the Northbridge context. The principles were deliberately kept simple to ensure that they were accessible to the general public.

Although the battle is far from won, the process so far has shown that strong intersectoral partnerships and information sharing is not only possible but vital. YACWA maintains strong links with a range of media and these have proved invaluable in finding new angles to keep the story alive. In recent weeks the West Australian newspaper’s own investigative reporting uncovered warnings given to the Premier about the legality of the policy and confirmed that the government had misled the public by claiming to have consulted with non government groups. Even though there is still public support for the curfew there are shifts within media commentators towards the YACWA perspective.

Recent reports from workers in the inner city indicate that the number of young people being picked up by the curfew is dwindling. After the initial public frenzy, it is anticipated that the curfew policy will eventually fade and police will continue to use section 138B on a needs basis. The impact of the policy will be felt by young people for years to come. Due to the Young people in Northbridge Policy they have been painted in the public domain as a threat or at best potentially threatening and unwelcome in their own city.

Download

No downloadable files available