 The Queensland Police Service, like every other government agency and private sector agency, known to me, has a performance management system. We are constantly looking at ways of improving that performance management system and the balance scorecard is a process well known in industries, both in the private and public sectors, that is used in that regard. The idea for us is that we will be looking at divisional performance using this template approach to performance of our people. It is not a quota system and any targets that we put in place are always aspirational. Just as I said that my vision, my target for the coming year is a 10% drop in crime and I'm talking about property crime and personal offences against the person. I think that that's achievable and I want to put that goal out there for our people. I'm happy to answer any questions that you might have. Does it differ from a quota system? Well quota systems are where a manufacturing firm for instance would say they want to have manufacture 5,000 widgets in a year. We don't do that in terms of our performance assessment. We'll say for instance one of the areas is community contact and how the officers are engaging with their local community. So how many it will mean that officers engage by going to PCYC meetings, that they'll be going to public meetings, this is officers in charge, we'll go to public meetings in their local area to engage with the key stakeholders around their area. It's about visiting schools, those sorts of things. But it is also about levels of crime in that community. The idea being that the officers know their local community, they know the variances that occur. If they happen to notice a trend in for instance soft target break and enters, then they'll do something about that. They'll put a strategy in place and they'll measure the success of that strategy by determining if the trend has been reversed. So they might be given like a sheet saying with a number of RBT's they're expected to do. More so if they finish a shift and they've done so many RBT's, they'll have to log that. Is that how it works? Absolutely, they'll log their performance so that we can, not we personally but at the divisional level so that officers in charge can ensure that the officer's time is being productively spent. The government give us a lot of money and assets to do our job. Part of our role strategically is to demonstrate that we've performed in a way which provides value for money for the community of Queensland. Every industry that I know, every other public service body that I know has performance management schemes. If performance is needed as these indicators though, want it to lead to police being pressured into trying to do more? I expect our people to do their job. Their job is to stop crime in the community, make the community safer and build relationships with our community on a constant and continuous basis. There needs to be ways that we can measure how that's occurring. And because the Queensland is such a large state and every area of the state has different factors impacting on it. For instance, what happens at Birdsville in a small area like that, a small rural country environment, is not going to be the same as what happens at Kirlan Gatter or in the Queen Street Mall. So we need to make sure that our officers are still performing in that strategic way, in that overarching way to stop crime, make the community safer and engage with the community. But they'll do it in different ways and they'll be measured in different ways in those areas. We've had a performance regime of individual performance and district monitoring for many years. This particular scheme is based on a work unit. So that work unit in the main will be divisions, police divisions, and we have a very large number of those right throughout the state. For instance, on the north side of Brisbane you have the Stafford Police Division, for instance, which is part of the North Brisbane District. And it is at that level where officers in charge and at Stafford they may have tens of officers, say 50 officers under their control, they will manage the performance of those 50 officers. And the division, the divisional performance will be the thing that's managed. One of the strengths of the system is that managers are asked to manage their staff so that they have to have an intimate knowledge of the people working for them, their capabilities, but certainly they also need to know what the issues are within that particular community where they work so that they can target those particular issues. Do the libertarians say it's a return to kill sheets? Yeah, that's really interesting because that was never part of the discussion that I had when explaining what a balance scorecard is about. You can actually Google the balance scorecard. It's a well-known performance system that's been used for many years. We've adjusted it and to make it more relevant to the needs of our organisation. But certainly the focus is on the team effort rather than the individual. It's up to managers of those teams, so the team leaders, in fact, to manage the performance and ensure that we're getting value for money from all our people. Are you worried that the public perception will be that police are out to get them? No, not at all. No, no, just the opposite. If people going about their lawful business, they have no problem with the police. I've said that many, many times. But if I was a criminal in this state, and as you know, we've been focusing very heavily on criminal motorcycle gang members for a number of months now and we will continue to do that, I'd be worried. But this is about ensuring that our people perform adequately and do their job and earn their pay, just like any other business. It's the same in the media, I would imagine, that you have performance agreements or performance measures within your industry. There's no difference with ours. Is the service increasingly being viewed as a business? Has it always been viewed that way? I'm sorry, could you repeat the question? Sorry, you said before that you want to demonstrate to Queenslanders that we're getting value for money out of our service. We've done it in a number of ways, but as I said right from the start we're always looking for better ways to demonstrate that performance to the community. You might remember the Paxar report that came out earlier this, sorry, in about the middle of last year, the report, the review undertaken by former commissioner Kilty. He was very keen on us being able to demonstrate a cost attribution model for performance. So for instance, every drug arrest would cost X number of dollars in personnel time and then you use that as your performance measure or your benchmark right across the state as to other people meeting that same benchmark or doing it more efficiently. Now whilst the cost attribution model is a very good model and it's one that we're exploring, as I said before, a drug arrest that happens at Birdsville is going to take a whole lot of different variables into account than one that occurs say at Cairns. And that's to do with distances, it's to do with the availability of support please, those sorts of things. Can you explain the reasoning behind the five centimetre law? Obviously, well sorry, before we do that. Are there any other questions about performance measures? That's actually payment work is required to complete these school funds. Thanks David. The system that we're working towards will be basically a technology based system and a lot of it will be self-populating. So the sorts of issues like the taskings that people get during a shift will self-populate into their working logs and ultimately into the figures that are aggregated up so that an officer in charge on a shift by shift basis can be checking the sorts of levels of performance that are going on by the team in their area. So in fact what we're attempting to do is to make this less paper based in terms of the work or the bureaucratic side of it. The whole idea is to make that itself a much more efficient and effective system. So an individual police officer at their end of their shift will have to plug in, type onto the system and jump their figures in, is that right? No, what I'm saying is the system will automatically do that. It'll be an automatic population of the templates that we need to measure our performance. And that will be taken from a range of resources, for instance our QPoM entries, but it might also be taken straight from their patrol log as well. The only other thing was that to what extent does this replace your OPRs? I think there's no longer OPRs. We're doing OPRs still at a district level and that's run by the five regional ACs, so they still do an OPR process. But the main focus of this performance system is at the unit level. So we're talking about the divisional building blocks for the whole organisation. And as you would know, we have divisions, then districts and then regions. Okay. Who knows? Who knows? The law says that if you leave a vehicle unattended, and that means that you're more than three metres away, the vehicle has to be locked, and the windows should be no more than five centimetres open. That was determined on the ability of someone to get their arm in to unlock that door, and five centimetres isn't all that much. It's probably about that size. I've actually had the opportunity to view footage of the actual offence committed in this case or the offence that's going to be alleged. I would back the judgement of my officer who undertook this enforcement action because from the footage that I saw and the reasons that I know the officer utilised to undertake this enforcement in that area, I think the officer was doing a good job. Now, to explain that, it's going to be alleged and as you know, this will ultimately, no doubt, be subject to a court matter. If the person doesn't wish to pay the ticket, they have the right to question and query the ticket by simply writing to the police department and asking for it to be reviewed, that's one way. Or the other way is that they can go straight to a court hearing. What's interesting about this particular matter is that the officer was acting on an intelligence brief from in that area that there'd been a number of thefts from motor vehicles and unlawful uses. The officer, in fact, had checked five vehicles. Two of those vehicles he gave tickets to, three he was able to locate the owners and the reason for that was that by checking the car registrations he was able to associate those with local houses. He went and he spoke to them, cautioned them for the offences so he used his discretion. This particular vehicle that was one of the two that he actually booked, it's my understanding he was unable to locate any person associated with that and as I said, I've seen the photographs that this officer took of the vehicle and what's interesting about it is that the vehicle actually commits three very obvious offences. It's parked on the incorrect side of the road. The second that it's parked on the footpath and the third that it actually doesn't obey the law in relation to the window being open. So the officer didn't give them three tickets. The officer simply gave this car a ticket for the matter that he was actually doing his job for which was to ensure was to try and drop the number of unlawful entries in the cars. So as I said, this will ultimately be a matter for the courts to decide, I would imagine, if this person wishes to plead not guilty and as I said, I've already seen the actual photographs and those will no doubt come out as evidence in the court case and that's why I'm not showing them to you right now because this shouldn't be a matter that's decided in the media. This is a matter that should be decided appropriately through the court process. But you're sure that enforcing the law is about preventing theft, is that right? What I'm saying is the officer acted quite appropriately and within the law and I would hope that the public would recognise that the officer did use his discretion. In fact, as I said, there were three possible offences that he could have booked that vehicle for. He chose to issue one infringement notice for the window being open. I think there's a common sense issue here. I often leave my vehicle windows open on a hot day because my vehicle often sits in the sun when I'm away from this building. I'll leave my window open, maybe one or two centimetres to let the air flow into the car like many Queenslanders and I mean, we live in a hot climate, there's no doubt about it. But the law was put in place for a simple reason. It was to stop people breaking into cars, stealing things or to actually from stealing the car and that's exactly what our officer was doing within the law and with discretion. He was simply doing his job. Do you think that some people in the public might think that it's a bit funny that you're going to punish a person who has the car as opposed to spending more time getting the thieves? There is that preventative side and that the law was put in place to help people understand that they need to assist themselves and us to prevent these types of offences and the law was made, as I remember, recollect to allow that common sense approach to leaving vehicle windows open slightly so that the vehicle could breathe and so that air could go through the vehicle and that's why the five centimetre rule was put in place. The commentary on social media is that people are concerned that police are out to find you for just minding your own business as opposed to going out and catching the car thief or the person who's on their mobile phone while driving who might cause an accident. Yeah, but I think that this is a good law. I actually think it's a very sensible law and I think that most members of the public in Queensland when they understand the facts of this matter that this wasn't just simply someone who had their window open a couple of centimetres to let it breathe like the Laurel Houseful. This was more than that. And the public need to take responsibility. If someone had come and stolen that car who was going to get called next? We would. At cost to the Queensland public. Our officer was being proactive and preventative in the nature of enforcement. What I've said is the officer actually took photographs of the scene. As he drove up to the vehicle he's taken a number of photos. And as I said, I'm not going to display them because quite rightly if this matter goes to court they will become evidence that a court of law and I don't want to be seen to be prejudging this case. This is a case that if this person claims they're right to take the matter to court then all the facts will be brought out in the court and it will be determined there. But what I am saying, I'm backing the officer's judgement 100%. All this officer was doing was their job and doing it quite appropriately. Was there place in other states? Is the law in place in other states or just Queensland? I have no idea about that. It's under our tow rums so our traffic law is here in Queensland. Generally, it's sympathetic to, you know, it's extremely hot weather at the moment especially people who have young children getting into very hot vehicles. David, you're absolutely right. As I said, I often leave my windows open but I leave them open within the law as I hope that any of you who do the same thing would do. That's all I'm saying. Is there any concern that because of these quotas that we're going to, sorry, the new report system that we're going to see more fines like this and less leniency from police to say, look, do you know that you're doing the wrong thing there? The answer to that is no. We've had performance management systems for a very long time. I'm just saying that when you take our performance management system we're looking at continually improving on that and that's what we've done with the balanced court code. What this officer was doing was exactly what we asked our police to do. They were looking at a local problem and the local problem was an increase in thefts from motor vehicles and unlawful uses in the area. He was enforcing the laws appropriately and he used his discretion. As I said, the photos clearly depict what I believe are three different offenses that he could have actually left infringement notice for. He chose not to do that. He left it for one. That would have caused the most problem and that is the window being open. It's very similar to the lock it and lose it campaign that we've run in car parks for many, many years. This officer was operating both, I think, quite strategically and proactively and within the law. Enough. Thanks, guys. Love you to see this.