Top cop says Sudanese youths are overrepresented in aggravated burglary

HOME invasions have become the “crime of choice” for young Sudanese offenders in Melbourne, says one of Victoria’s top cops.

Census data shows people born in Sudan make up about 0.1 per cent of Victoria’s population — yet Victoria’s Crime Statistics Agency (CSA) data shows that 8.6 per cent of aggravated burglaries in the state are committed by Sudanese youths.

Andrew Crisp, Victoria Police’s Deputy Commissioner, told 7.30 last night that the statistics reflect what the officers have seen on the ground.

“We’ve seen Sudanese youth become involved in aggravated burglaries,” he told the show. “A lot of the time it’s to steal keys, so they can steal cars to commit further crimes.

“It has become the crime of choice for this particular group.”

An aggravated burglary is basically a home invasion — meaning somebody is at home when the offence is committed.

“We’ve been talking about this for a couple of years now and it’s about network offending,” he told 7.30. “So, it’s not that you’ve got a core group of six, generally young, men committing crime over a number of nights.

“What we have seen is that you might see half a dozen involved in an aggravated burglary, steal a car and commit some further offences that night.

“The next night, you might have two of those offenders, but there could be three or four new ones that have come from other parts of Melbourne — networking through social media.”

He said many members of Apex had been arrested, but an area of concern was young people going into prison only to be influenced by the gang’s members who were already serving time.

However, Deputy Commissioner Crisp echoed previous statements made by Victoria Police members about Menace to Society — dismissing them as a ragtag group of thugs.

“Menace to Society is a tag, which has been used by a number of different groups over the years,” he told the ABC.

“We suggest that this is not an organised gang in terms of any organisation and structure.”

Despite a string of high-profile incidents involving African youths, the overall crime rate in Victoria fell for the first time in six years last year — according to CSA.

The agency released its latest data report in December — which stated that overall criminal incidents recorded in Victoria was down 4.8 per cent and there were significant downward trends in many crime types.

The CSA told a federal parliamentary inquiry on migrant settlement outcomes that about 1.5 per cent of criminal offenders in Victoria were Sudanese.

The agency’s data for the year to June 2017 shows Sudanese-born offenders were allegedly involved in 98 aggravated burglaries in the state, compared to 540 Australian-born offenders.

For the same period, 45 serious assaults were allegedly committed by Sudanese-born offenders, compared to 1462 Australian-born offenders.

The data shows, unsurprisingly, that the majority of crimes in Victoria are committed by Australians. It also shows Sudanese immigrants are over-represented in the crime statistics.

However, Anthony Kelly, the executive officer of Flemington and Kensington Community Legal Centre, said the figures should be treated with caution.

He told The Guardian the Sudanese community in Australia had a much younger average age and were subject to issues such as poverty and a lack of engagement in work and school — which increased the likelihood of being involved in crime.

The issue of “gang crime” caused an awkward moment for the Prime Minister yesterday in a cringe-worthy joint press conference with Victoria’s acting Labor Premier James Merlino — which was supposed to promote funding for Geelong.

“We don’t want to have an awkward discussion here, I think James understands that the responsibility for keeping Victorians safe on the street is the Victorian government’s,” Mr Turnbull said.

“(Opposition Leader) Matt Guy has reforms that he wants to advance that’ll be fought out in the state election.”

That prompted Mr Merlino to fire back with “facts” about the state Opposition stalling stricter firearms laws in Parliament.

“Your counterpart, ... Matthew Guy and the Liberal Party, are stalling that legislation and seeking to water it down,” Mr Merlino said.

“So the best thing you can do, Malcolm, for Victoria is get on the phone, talk to the mobster’s mate, Matthew Guy, and your Liberal Party to support that legislation.”

Last year it was revealed Mr Guy had a lobster dinner with alleged mafia boss Tony Madafferi.

SOURCE






‘Tens of thousands’ to join Australia Day activist WAR

Indigenous activists calling for the abolition of Australia Day expect tens of thousands of protesters to swamp Melbourne’s CBD next week, saying a groundswell of support is building for more drastic action than changing the date of the national holiday.

Warriors of the Aboriginal Resistance (WAR) — which refuses to engage with police or Melbourne City Council to co-ordinate the ‘‘Invasion Day’’ rally — anticipate a protest larger than last year, which drowned out the city’s official Australia Day parade, encouraged by vocal support from some Melbourne councils.

Organiser Tarneen Onus-Williams said the “change the date” campaign to switch Australia Day from January 26 had overshadowed ongoing issues relating to Aborigines and risked becoming a token gesture akin to Kevin Rudd’s apology to the Stolen Generations.

“People think just change the date and it’s going to be fine,” said Ms Onus-Williams, who identifies as a Yigar Gunditjmara and Bindal woman.

“People say they’re celebrating a great country. Celebrating a great country — Australia — has come at a loss for so many people, especially Aboriginal people. “Most people who think this is a great country are white people.”

Ms Onus-Williams said last year’s decision by Yarra, Darebin and Moreland councils in Melbourne’s inner-northern suburbs to drop Australia Day cele­brations was a significant sign of solidarity.

Yarra and Darebin councils were consequently stripped of their ability to hold citizenship ceremonies, while Moreland council received a warning from the federal government.

Councils in Fremantle and Hobart have also expressed support for changing the date of Australia Day. Other rallies condemning Australia Day — smaller than the Melbourne event — will be held in other capital cities on Friday week.

Fellow WAR organiser Arika Waulu said the group made a conscious decision not to consult police or Melbourne City Council about the upcoming rally, which last year drew between 10,000 and 50,000 people, according to varying estimates, blocking traffic as protesters staged a sit-in.

“As sovereign people we don’t seek authority to walk on our own land,” she said. “We want it (Australia Day) to be abolished until there’s something to celebrate. It’s never going to be OK to celebrate it on any other day.”

A City of Melbourne spokesman said peaceful protests of a political or religious nature were allowed under the Victorian Charter of Human Rights, though roads could be closed only by council, police or VicRoads.

Greens leader Richard Di Nat­ale will join the rally as it leaves Parliament House, as will Greens MP Lidia Thorpe, who has called for Australian and Aboriginal flags on government buildings to fly at half-mast that day.

Ms Waulu said the group had received threats from some far-right groups.

Nationalist groups True Blue Crew and the United Patriots Front are organising a beach party at the St Kilda foreshore on Australia Day, prompting Port Phillip Mayor Bernadene Voss to yesterday warn that alcohol consumption and rowdy behaviour would not be tolerated.

Ms Voss said the council did not issue permits for events on Australia Day because it wanted the beach and other public areas to be accessible to everyone.

The beach was trashed by 5000 drunken revellers on Christmas Day last year.

SOURCE






More Australian graduates head into part-time jobs as economic chill persists

Economic chill my foot.  Employment grew markedly last year.  The economy delivered a near record 380,000 new jobs last year — most of them full-time.  The problem is useless degrees and the continual dumbing down of what is taught

Impact of global financial crisis and increased supply of university-educated candidates leaves 38% of graduates in part-time work

University leavers in Australia are increasingly settling for part-time employment after graduation as a flood of job seekers holding bachelor degrees dilute their own buying power.

On Friday the latest graduate outcomes survey revealed that the last decade has seen a rise of 17 percentage points increase in the number of university leavers in part-time employment, while the number of recent graduates in full-time work remains stubbornly below below the levels of the global financial crisis.

It’s what the survey authors say is part of a “pronounced trend towards part-time employment among graduates”. Between 2008 and 2017 the proportion of employed graduates working part-time increased by 17 percentage points to 38% of all graduates.

While the shift to part-time employment is part of a broader trend in the labour market, it’s particularly pronounced amongst university leavers.

For example in 2017 male graduates were far more likely to be employed part-time than the overall male workforce. Part-time employment was 32% for male graduates compared with 18.7% for employed men overall.

Phil Lewis, the director of the Centre for Labour Market Research at the University of Canberra, said the trend to part-time employment was down to supply and demand.

Between 2009 and 2016 domestic undergraduate enrolments grew by 33%, which Lewis said was have an impact on employer choice.

“There’s a certain number of people and a certain number of jobs,” he said. “When the economy is booming the queue becomes very short so employers take whoever they can get [but] the huge increase in graduates since the introduction of the demand-driven system just means the queue gets bigger.

“These people will get a job eventually but at the moment new graduates are right at the back because employers can pick whoever they want.”

The survey also found that since 2008 the full-time employment rate among bachelor degree holders has fallen from 85% to 71.8%.

Bruce Guthrie, a research manager from Graduate Careers Australia, said: “In a way it’s the unfortunate timing of an increase in graduate output coinciding with a reduced demand for new graduates.

“I used to hold out hopes that the situation would return to pre-GFC levels of strong employment outcomes for new graduates but it looks like the GFC has dislocated many industries and patterns of doing business world-wide and it might be that we’ll never get back to those levels of demand.”

The survey comes as the federal education minister Simon Birmingham engages in a war with universities over funding.

In its mid-year budget update the government announced it will cut $2.2bn from universities predominantly through a two-year freeze in commonwealth grants funding for teaching and learning – effectively the end of the demand-driven system.

The minister has signalled that he will seek to force universities to improve graduate outcomes by attaching performance-based measures including graduate outcomes to funding.

He said the survey demonstrated the benefits of “ensuring universities are more accountable and transparent about the job prospects of their graduates”.

“For example the results show that 82% of graduates with degrees in teaching secured full-time employment within four months of finishing, with the figure dipping to 60% for graduates in the creative arts and communications fields,” he said.

But Catriona Jackson, Universities Australia acting chief executive, pointed out the figures only accounted for graduate outcomes four months after graduating.

“The data shows that graduates, like everyone entering the labour market, need time to establish in their careers. But this immediate outlook can shift quickly – within three years of finishing their studies, nine in 10 graduates are employed full-time,” she said.

SOURCE






Now political correctness is making its way into drivers' licences

The Queensland Government has scrapped a requirement for gender to be shown on all driver's licences, after complaints from the LGBTI community.

The Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR) confirmed that height was also removed as a requirement, after concerns the collection of personal information was potentially discriminatory.

However, the Department said the move towards gender-less licences was due to the need to make driver's and marine licences compliant with new anti-discrimination laws, according to the Courier Mail.

Another reason for change was due to improvements in technology, a spokesman for Roads Minister Mark Bailey said.

'TMR has received complaints and suggestions from members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex community about displaying gender/sex (M or F) on TMR cards,' a department document said.

Other information, such as eye and hair colour, is also being removed from records attached to licences.

'TMR has received feedback that the collection of personal information (eye and hair colour, complexion, height) may be perceived as discriminatory by some members of the community.'

Police will still have access to information on gender through databases, and drivers will still be asked to nominate their gender when applying for a licence.

The TMR stopped recording people's gender and height for all new and renewed licences in October 2016.

SOURCE





Is it really so difficult to deport criminal non-citizens? Experts say it's actually easy

Amid the soul-searching about Sudanese gangs and organised crime, many commentators and observers have been left scratching their heads about why it seems to so hard to deport criminal non-citizens.

A narrative has formed in which the courts and crafty lawyers regularly stymie the efforts of the federal government and police to rid the streets of thugs.

Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton has lashed out at the Victorian government, saying it has not done enough to stem "African gang violence".

Three such cases have recently come to light. One involves a 25-year-old South Sudanese armed robber who came to Australia on a refugee visa - he had his deportation order put on hold by a Federal Court judge because his siblings might be negatively affected.

An apparent Apex gang leader, Isaac Gatkuoth, served 16 months in jail for a violent carjacking while high on ice and is now fighting his deportation order. In another example, a South Sudanese criminal was granted a reprieve because he wasn't given adequate notice of his visa cancellation.

Such instances compel particular angst on talkback radio and in other forums that lend themselves to consternation about law and order. At times, cabinet ministers have joined in the criticism of weak judges and pesky appeals tribunals.

The reality is somewhat different. Judges are not overturning decisions to deport criminals - in fact, they do not even have that power. They are simply examining whether the minister has followed proper legal process in making his decision.

Here's an example. Someone who is not an Australian citizen commits his third crime and the minister - or a departmental delegate - decides to cancel his visa and deport him. If the minister makes the decision personally, there is no right of review at the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. If it was a delegate, the man can try his luck at the AAT.

In either case, the man can go to the Federal Court for judicial review. This is not an appeal. The judge cannot reinstate his visa, but she can find that the law wasn't properly followed - such as a failure to even consider the impact of deportation upon the man's family.

"What the court does is it looks at the legality of the decision that has been made," explains Mary Crock, professor of law at Sydney University. "It's [then] open to the government or the tribunal to go back and effectively make the same decision but in a legally correct way, taking into account all relevant considerations."

In other words, it doesn't change anything. The minister will almost always make the same decision again, but in a more legally robust way.

"All the minister has to do is make the decision correctly and the person gets deported," says Nicholas Poynder, a Sydney-based barrister specialising in immigration. "If the decision is legally erroneous then the court is entitled to set that aside and return it to the decision-maker to do properly."

Mr Poynder argues the government actually has "extraordinary power" in immigration cases. For one thing, the minister (at this time Peter Dutton) has the power to set aside a decision of the AAT and substitute a new one - basically, he can overrule the reviewing authority. This happened to one of Mr Poynder's clients two days before Christmas. "I find that unfair," he says.

Neither does Mr Poynder believe the AAT is a soft touch, hellbent on reversing the government's decisions. He says it is like any tribunal - some members will be more sympathetic than others, and will approach a particular set of facts from different perspectives. In all these cases, the minister is represented at the tribunal hearing anyway.

Critically, it is also the case that most of these people are behind bars while their legal appeals are underway - they are not out on the streets. If someone's visa is cancelled while they are in jail, they go straight into immigration detention at the conclusion of their prison term. If they are not required to attend a Federal Court hearing in Sydney or Melbourne, they may be held at Christmas Island or in Western Australia.

"They're not a threat to the Australian community at that time," says Carina Ford, who runs a large migration law agency based in Footscray. "These people have completed their sentences, [but] they're still in detention."

Ms Ford, who regularly works on cases involving Sudanese and African migrants, says a black-and-white view of these matters is too simplistic. She believes decision-makers should take into account the impact of deportation on families, as well as the risks of returning a person to the country from which they fled, and whether they were given enough support in the first place.

"When you're dealing with it at the coalface, you can see the personal impact on families," she says. "This concept where you can simply send them back and get rid of them is just not accurate."

SOURCE

Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here