Broken Windows Theory, does it fit Fremantle

I raise this as when it comes to crime this is really a state gov issue.  The council does not the resources or responsibilities for police activities. Where the council can have an impact is by ensuring the COF district is kept in a manner where it would not encourage or attract the petty problems that drive or encourage more serious crime.

As you will read its the little issue’s that allow a environment to develop that cultures more serious crime.

Its the little things that council can control which would  encourage or discourage a environment for more serious criminal activity.

Issues like;

  • Over grown verges, sets an image of lack of care, not great for snakes now summer is coming either.
  • A built up or road side collection, (has become a hiding place drop point  for the drug dealers.) as well as being unsightly and as locals notice it encourages more rubbish to be dumped, the basics of broken windows theory.
  • Illegal parking for cars allowing stolen vehicles to be dumped and left for months.
  • The increase in street begging and vagrancy, in the CBD has left our city with a shocking image of anti-social behaviour has been a killer to get good quality retailers back to town.
  • The alcohol policy not being enforced allowing alcohol driven events to be the citys focus bringing with it all the anti-social issues it attracts. Street drunkenness has also helped fuel the drug issues in town.
  • Poor maintenance with road sumps and subsiding fences allowing them to be accessed by criminals as stash or hiding places, these have been left in disrepair for months Fremantles Dangerous Street Sumps , this was reported back in June still not fixed. Now another one just down the street also has a broken fence, nothing done again in months.
  • Graffiti is another attraction for petty crimes leading to more serious criminal activity. The council policy encourages Grafitti which is proven to be a catalysis for other crimes refer the polices goodbyegrafitti website
  • Bike helmets, bike lights, riding on the wrong side of the road and the plethora of other road rules which are regularly ignored in Fremantle
  • The list goes, they may sound petty but this is where it all starts, this is the base of the Broken Windows theory that neglect allows issues to build and get worse

These issues are in councils control,  yet sadly they have fail to address them and even encourage these activities, which creates an environment that allows these sorts of activities to grow, and attract more anti-social activity, now to fix the problem of cause will be longer and more expensive.

 

 

Consider a building with a few broken windows. If the windows are not repaired, the tendency is for vandals to break a few more windows. Eventually, they may even break into the building, and if it’s unoccupied, perhaps become squatters or light fires inside.

Or consider a pavement. Some litter accumulates. Soon, more litter accumulates. Eventually, people even start leaving bags of refuse from take-out restaurants there or even break into cars.

Broken windows theory, academic theory proposed by James Q. Wilson and George Kelling in 1982 that used broken windows as a metaphor for disorder within neighbourhoods. Their theory links disorder and incivility within a community to subsequent occurrences of serious crime

Broken windows theory had an enormous impact on police policy throughout the 1990s and remained influential into the 21st century. Perhaps the most notable application of the theory was in New York under the direction of Police Commissioner William Bratton. He and others were convinced that the aggressive order-maintenance practices of the New York City Police Department were responsible for the dramatic decrease in crimerates within the city during the 1990s. Bratton began translating the theory into practice as the chief of New York City’s transit police from 1990 to 1992. Squads of plainclothes officers were assigned to catch turnstile jumpers, and, as arrests for misdemeanours increased, subway crimes of all kinds decreased dramatically. In 1994, when he became New York City police commissioner, Bratton introduced his broken windows-based “quality of life initiative.” This initiative cracked down on panhandling, disorderly behaviour, public drinking, street prostitution, and unsolicited windshield washing or other such attempts to obtain cash from drivers stopped in traffic. When Bratton resigned in 1996, felonies were down almost 40 percent in New York, and the homicide rate had been halved.

Prior to the development and implementation of various incivility theories such as broken windows, law enforcement scholars and police tended to focus on serious crime; that is, the major concern was with crimes that were perceived to be the most serious and consequential for the victim, such as raperobbery, and murder. Wilson and Kelling took a different view. They saw serious crime as the final result of a lengthier chain of events, theorizing that crime emanated from disorder and that if disorder were eliminated, then serious crimes would not occur.

Their theory further posits that the prevalence of disorder creates fear in the minds of citizens who are convinced that the area is unsafe. This withdrawal from the community weakens social controls that previously kept criminals in check. Once this process begins, it feeds itself. Disorder causes crime, and crime causes further disorder and crime.

Scholars generally define two different types of disorder. The first is physical disorder, typified by vacant buildings, broken windows, abandoned vehicles, and vacant lots filled with trash. The second type is social disorder, which is typified by aggressive panhandlers, noisy neighbours, and groups of youths congregating on street corners. The line between crime and disorder is often blurred, with some experts considering such acts as prostitution and drug dealing as disorder while many others classify them as crimes. While different, these two types of disorder are both thought to increase fear among citizens.

The obvious advantage of this theory over many of its criminological predecessors is that it enables initiatives within the realm of criminal justice policy to effect change, rather than relying on social policy. Earlier social disorganization theories and economic theories offered solutions that were costly and would take a long time to prove effective. Broken windows theory is seen by many as a way to effect change quickly and with minimal expense by merely altering the police crime-control strategy. It is far simpler to attack disorder than it is to attack such ominous social ills as poverty and inadequate education.”

What’s happened to Fremantle Councils Missed Opportunity with Plastic Bags

plastic bag smile1

The council and Mayor Brad Pettitt instead of pushing for a law to fine/punish business for not using the biodegradable bags, could have taken this idea and turn it more to a marketing opportunity. Given Fremantle another brand, it would even opened them up to run a competition for logos, branding, marketing etc.

Taking something like the BID, and using a Fremantle branded Biodegradable bag to sell to businesses in town, with a simple QR barcode on the bag that could link back to a website promoting all the business that have Opted to join Fremantle’s councils save the ocean or cut plastic bag usage or whatever program. It could be used as a tool to promote Fremantle businesses that are ecco friendly or ethical.

Giving consumers and informed choice of where they could choose to shop and businesses a choice of whether they take part or not. More carrot less whip.

Then there are the added benefits to business that bulk purchasing would lower the cost to the business, as collective buying would enable you to bargain a better price for bags, giving business a lower cost than them going out and sourcing them for themselves. Possible seasonal marketing programs, shops using the brand to promote their own business etc. The city using it to promote events etc.

Instead of education and encouragement the council has chosen the whip over the carrot to drive their ideology with Fremantle businesses and wasted time and resources with a pissing contest with the state government. Which smells more of more of cheap nasty party politics than good environmental outcomes. Fremantle’s councils true weakness.

Personally I’m all for changing the plastic bags to a better product, but I’m against the COF starting its own little state by making up its own laws, especially when the law they put in place will have little to no practical outcome. Fremantle banning bags will no practical measurable outcome for the environment, its just another cheap political stunt, some banner waving to distract from real issues the cities has. Its also another example of poorly spend rate payers money for something that will have little or no benefit in the end at all.

If what the Fremantle council says is true why do Fremantle business use plastic bags why do they have them at all?

If customers didn’t want plastic bags they would not use them.

So if what the council says is true that business and customers don’t want them then the bags would not be in shops and customers would chose not to take them. If the community feeling was so strong this issue would have sorted its self out by now

We don’t need another level of government making laws.

Banning plastic bags in Fremantle would achieve nothing, Fremantle’s retail is dying as it is, how many people in Fremantle shop outside Freo where the ban would stop. So just bringing back their plastic bags from other suburbs.

It’s ridiculous to think the plastic bag is legal on the east side of East St and illegal on the west side of it.

The efforts should be placed making the bags ban for the whole state or country.

While the council is preaching why do they use single use plastic bags in their own street bins with no garbage separation? Fremantle city council can’t even supply recycling bins in the streets it all goes straight to land fill

recycle bins

Something Fremantle Lacks

Why does the council not have separated garbage for commercial operations in town instead everything goes into one bin for land fill I guess.

Perhaps they should get their own house in order first before dictating to the world how it should be?

America already has a screwed up system with county’s making their own laws and enforcing them, lets no go down that path and leave law making to the State Government. Its starting to look more and more political the actions of Fremantle council and less and less like a local government to take care of services and amenities to the resident and rate payers of Fremantle.

Over the last couple of days there has been a bit chat about the state government not pushing through the COF plastic bag ban.

Peter Katsambanis MLC has said  the businesses he has spoken to are not in favour, hes probably better off to not to name them so they don’t have to suffer any backlash from some of the extremists.

Bid to block plastic ban irks councils I’m always amazed to hear councillors say how they speak for the majority especially when so few people actually vote in local elections. If the MLC is so out of touch with community wants/concerns etc, again I ask why so many people use plastic bags and so many businesses have them, if community will was as strong as they make out, this issue would be self regulating with customers refusing plastic bags or not returning to shops that use them, businesses not wanting to lose customers would naturally change their operation to keep customers happy, but that’s not what happening, so who’s out of touch with what the real majority want?

Bid to block plastic ban irks councils

“Mr Katsambanis last month introduced a motion to disallow Fremantle’s plastic bag ban. The law has been tweaked since Fremantle’s last attempt was disallowed by the parliamentary committee charged with reviewing local laws, which includes Mr Katsambanis.

Mr Katsambanis said Fremantle retailers had overwhelmingly told him they feared being disadvantaged if the ban went ahead. He said allowing councils to introduce plastic bag bans “ad hoc” would lead to uncertainty and disadvantage local small businesses.

“Local governments have an important role to play in their community but every law or by-law that they pass is subject to review by the State,” he said. “Many of these retailers have expressed fear that if they went public with their concerns there may be a backlash from council or the proponents of the plastic bag ban.”

Fremantle Council Whats the Real Deal on Plastic Bag Ban?

Fremantle’s Plastic Bag Saga

So I guess we are waiting for parliament to sit so we can find out what the outcome will be.

 

Fremantle’s Plastic Bag Saga

round about sign

Are plastic bags bad, yes I don’t think many people think they are good think, handy yes, but good for us I doubt it?

Fremantle plastic bag ban should be overturned, says WA Liberal MP Peter Katsambanis

Anyway last year Fremantle had a shot at it, (banning plastic bags) it was overturned by state government, why, well probably because it’s up to the state government to make laws for WA, not Fremantle Council. That may come as a shock to some of them but that’s reality.

I can hear the calls from some now, it’s what the Fremantle community wants, really, and if that was so it would already be in place as a good business practice. As if that’s what business wanted they would just buy the already easily obtainable biodegradable or degradable bags, about twice the price but if that’s what your customer wants, it would be a poor business decision not to use them. The fact that businesses do not have on mass in Freo just shows it’s not a priority for its customers base. If I go to peaches and they ask me box or bag, I choose the box also because it’s good for my compost.

It’s ridiculous that you can walk across the road, from Fremantle to East Freo walk into a deli buy something that will come in a plastic bag and walk home to Fremantle with your now illegal purchase. Fremantle is not big enough to have any impact on this issue to be worthwhile. If individual’s want this to happen then petition your local state or better federal members and take the issue to that level of government where it belongs, it’s not a local government issue.

Don’t know anything about Peter Katsambanis but his reported comments all seemed like common sense. I can hear the liberal bashing coming already.

Now I’m sure some will argue “it’s a great test case” seriously S.A. has been doing it for years if you need any facts just look at their data.  That’s not an invitation for council to sponsor a plastic bag junket to S.A., I’m sure the facts are online or maybe a couple of quick emails would get all the info needed on the situation. Same as their can recycle system, been around for years no need for test cases, they have all the info one would need.

Well just to wait and see what the government decides to do now, allow Freo to make its own laws, maybe take the issue state wide or just a quick no, time will tell?

Councils’ Costly World Tour For Rubbish Junkets Continues

Perth councils’ costly world tour for a rubbish solution.

jet polution

Here we go again, we see reported in the West another overseas junket trip for councils to look at how to manage waste?

What a joke, with the internet why is it necessary to travel over the world to see how to handle rubbish. 

Just recently we see council in Fremantle approve the Mayors trip to Europe to see how our city can be made more liveable, another waste of rate payer’s money, then he was just recently off in Adelaide, now it’s to Poland to look at rubbish.

Last year it was Japan to see how the Japanese run an incinerator to burn waste.

Just recently Brad was quoted in the Herald as saying it’s a job for state government to handle. “Fremantle mayor Brad Pettitt supports the SMRC conducting the review but wants the WA government to take over waste management.”

So why does he need to go?

What’s the next trip going to be for? 

Shouldn’t the issue be how to create less waste not just burn it, wouldn’t that be more sustainable than flying around the world burning jet fuel leaving a massive carbon foot print. It would certainly be more sustainable for our rates

Fremantle Rubbish and its Waste

jet polution

Last year our mayor flew to Japan with entourage to look at incinerators to burn rubbish.

After the rubbish junket there was also a meeting at the council building to hear all the proposals on about our fab new save the environment rubbish incinerator. That was the last I’ve heard of it.

Till now I have not heard anything from council on our new system or timeline. Put into that Brad told us we were getting a 3 bin system as well, some trial I have not heard any more on this either,

Each week you put out two bins:

  • The organics bin (lime green bin) is the main service and is collected weekly.
  • Rubbish bins (red or dark green lid) are collected fortnightly on the opposite week to recycling.
  • Recycling bins (yellow lid) are collected fortnightly on the opposite week to rubbish.

Well that’s how it works in other suburbs

So as a city we invested in time, flights, hotels, general expenses to look at a system we have no real plans to implement, I hope I’m wrong, otherwise just another waste of rate payer funds. I’m sure the sushi was good but any info you needed to get on this system was surely online.

I don’t know if Tokyo is a good place to view such a system as its input of rubbish would not be comparable to a country like Australia as the amount and type of rubbish we generate is different in both type and volume.

Currently I have bugger all in my green lid when it is collected weekly unless it’s a lot of garden rubbish I can’t put in my compost. So council sends a truck to my house each week to collect bugger all, if you are recycling correctly I don’t see how you can have that much rubbish for the green bin.

The Facebook link to see how our supposed green council runs its rubbish system. Interesting reading see the impact our rubbish has on others.

Facebook link 2

Strange also that a council that wants to ban plastic bags, to save the environment has another issue with its SMRC compost. Which I believe still has a problem being full of shards of plastic and glass through the compost, due to separation issues. So while we are banning plastic bags on one hand on the other it looks like COF are paying someone to spread little bits of plastic all over our environment? The spin just goes on and on. Further due to the fact we pay SMRC to take rubbish excess or waste is another thing we the rate payers fund. I’m sure compost full of glass and plastic does not get a good return, so that loss of revenue is an increase in cost to us the rate payers.

It’s reported that Brad wants the state government to take over waste management, so why was it necessary to go Japan for something he wants the State Government to run. As the council were not investing, building, or running this new incinerator I wonder why a trips to Japan was necessary at all, as all the city will really do is tell the truck drivers to go to different address. I wonder how many trip our councillors take on our behalf and what we spend on such trips over the years? What does the rate payer actually get out of it. Considering their concern for the environment and the impact we have on it, I wonder if they factor in the carbon impact with the flights they use?

I read an interesting site a while back which got me thinking what happen to all talk at council about our new garbage system. No burn, it had an interesting heading, Incineration is not sustainable.  A quote from the site,

“In Brescia, Italy, they spent about $400,000,000 building an incinerator and have created just 80 full-time jobs. While Nova Scotia, a province of Canada, after rejecting an incinerator, has created over 3000 jobs in the handling of the discarded resources and in the industries using these secondary materials.

For every four tons of trash burned you get at least one ton of ash: 90% is called bottom ash (that is the ash collected under the furnace) and 10% is the very toxic fly ash.”

So strange our Mayor a sustainability educator would choose burning rubbish over recycling it or more importantly working to lower the amount we waste in the first place? I guess another trip to Japan will be needed, to see how the Japanese produce far less waste per person than we do? Then there is the issue of nano toxicology, these wonderful incinerators produce nano particles, smaller than a micron, which can cross lung membrane and enter our blood stream, that doesn’t sound very sustainable.

Why push for a system that’s bad for jobs, has a negative impact on our environment(dioxins), the only ones I see benefiting is the company that builds and operates the incinerator and its investors, so good for big business and large corporations, plus the ones who fly around looking at them.

This is a better direction than burning it, what i would sustainable. Only thing this takes real effort not spin and media bites.

 

%d bloggers like this: