DOCSLIB.ORG

AFP Annual Report 2014-15

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

ANNUAL REPORT 2014–15 ANNUAL REPORT 2014–15 ISSN 0728-4691 © Commonwealth of Australia, Australian Federal Police, 2015 Ownership of intellectual property rights in this publication Unless otherwise noted, copyright (and any other intellectual property rights, if any) in this publication is owned by the Commonwealth of Australia. Creative Commons licence This publication is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia Licence, a standard form licence agreement that allows you to copy, distribute, transmit and adapt this publication provided that you attribute the work. A summary of the licence terms is available from http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/deed.en. The full licence terms are available from http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/legalcode. The Commonwealth’s preference is that you attribute this publication (and any material sourced from it) using the following wording: Source: Licensed from the Commonwealth of Australia under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia Licence. The Commonwealth of Australia does not necessarily endorse the content of this publication. Contact officer for this report Inquiries about this report should be directed to: Manager Internal Audit and Business Analysis Workforce and Development Australian Federal Police GPO Box 401 Canberra ACT 2601 Phone: (02) 6131 5719 Email: [email protected] General inquiries Post: Written requests for general information can be sent to: Australian Federal Police GPO Box 401 Canberra ACT 2601 Telephone: General inquiries can be made by phoning the AFP’s national switchboard on (02) 6131 3000. For freedom of information requests, phone the AFP on (02) 6131 6131 or send an email to [email protected]. Internet: For general information, go to the AFP website: www.afp.gov.au. For an electronic version of this annual report and previous annual reports, go to: www.afp.gov.au/media-centre/publications/annual-reports.aspx. 16 October 2015 The Hon Michael Keenan MP Minister for Justice House of Representatives Parliament House Canberra ACT 2600 Dear Minister I am pleased to submit the Australian Federal Police Annual Report for the period 1 July 2014 to 30 June 2015. This report includes: ¢¢the annual report of the Australian Federal Police prepared in accordance with the Australian Federal Police Act 1979 (Cth) and the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability (PGPA) Act 2013 (Cth) ¢¢the annual report about authorities for assumed identities pursuant to section 15LD(1) of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) ¢¢the annual report on the National Witness Protection Program pursuant to section 30(2) of the Witness Protection Act 1994 (Cth). This report has been prepared in accordance with the relevant acts and the Requirements for Annual Reports for Departments, Executive Agencies and Other Non-Corporate Commonwealth Entities. A copy of this report is to be presented to each House of Parliament on or before 31 October 2015. In accordance with section 10 of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Rule 2014, I hereby certify that the Australian Federal Police has prepared fraud risk assessments and fraud control plans, and has in place appropriate fraud prevention, detection, investigation and reporting mechanisms. The Australian Federal Police is also taking all reasonable measures to minimise the incidence of fraud in the agency and to investigate and recover the proceeds of fraud against the agency. Yours sincerely Andrew Colvin APM OAM Commissioner AFP PRINCIPAL LOCATIONS National Headquarters Adelaide Office Edmund Barton Building Level 8, 55 Currie Street 47 Kings Avenue Adelaide SA 5000 Barton ACT 2600 (08) 8416 2811 (02) 6131 3000 Media inquiries: (02) 6131 6333 Brisbane Office 203 Wharf Street ACT Policing Spring Hill Qld 4000 Winchester Police Centre (07) 3222 1222 Cnr Benjamin Way and College Street Belconnen ACT 2617 Cairns Office (02) 6256 7777 422 Sheridan Street Media inquiries: (02) 6264 9460 Cairns Qld 4870 Adelaide Office (07) 4040 1777 Level 8, 55 Currie Street Darwin Office 4 Pedersen Road Marrara NT 0812 (08) 8980 1300 Hobart Office Level 7, 47 Liverpool Street Hobart Tas. 7000 (03) 6230 1510 Melbourne Office 383 La Trobe Street Melbourne Vic. 3000 (03) 9607 7777 Perth Office 619 Murray Street West Perth WA 6005 (08) 9320 3444 Sydney Office 110 Goulburn Street Sydney South NSW 2000 (02) 9286 4000 iv CONTENTS Letter of transmittal iii 6 GOVERNANCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY 93 AFP Principal Locations iv Chief of Staff 95 1 COMMISSIONER’S REVIEW 1 Corporate Governance 99 Ecologically Sustainable Development 2 OVERVIEW OF THE AFP 7 and Environmental Performance 102 Role and Functions 8 External Scrutiny 103 Strategic Priorities 9 Finance and Commercial 106 Reporting Structure 11 Human Resources 110 Strategic Leaders’ Group 13 Information and Communications Future Directions Project 14 Technology 118 3 PERFORMANCE OVERVIEW 17 7 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 121 Outcome 1 National Policing 18 8 APPENDICES 171 Outcome 2 ACT Policing 29 Appendix A: Corporate Integrity 172 4 PERFORMANCE REPORT—OPERATIONS 31 Appendix B: Advertising and Market Research 178 Aviation 32 Appendix C: Staffing Statistics 179 Counter Terrorism 35 Appendix D: Entity Resource Crime Program 41 Statement and Resources for Outcomes 189 High Tech Crime Operations 54 Appendix E: List of Requirements 193 International Deployment Group 61 Protection 69 ANNEX A: ASSUMED IDENTITIES ANNUAL REPORT 2014–15 199 5 PERFORMANCE REPORT—SUPPORT 77 ANNEX B: NATIONAL WITNESS PROTECTION Forensics 78 PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT 2014–15 203 Intelligence 82 SHORTENED FORMS 209 Operations Support 86 GLOSSARY 211 INDEX 213 v AFP ANNUAL REPORT 2014–15 TABLES TABLE 1 PERFORMANCE OF PROGRAMME 1.1 FEDERAL POLICING AND NATIONAL SECURITY IN RELATION TO KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS 19 TABLE 2 PERFORMANCE OF PROGRAMME 1.1 FEDERAL POLICING AND NATIONAL SECURITY IN RELATION TO DELIVERABLE INDICATORS 21 TABLE 3 PERFORMANCE OF PROGRAMME 1.2 INTERNATIONAL POLICE ASSISTANCE IN RELATION TO KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS 27 TABLE 4 PERFORMANCE OF PROGRAMME 1.2 INTERNATIONAL POLICE ASSISTANCE IN RELATION TO DELIVERABLE INDICATORS 28 TABLE 5 DRUG SEIZURES 2013–14 AND 2014–15 43 TABLE 6 CONTRACTS WITHOUT AUDITOR-GENERAL ACCESS 2014–15 108 TABLE 7 EXPENDITURE ON CONSULTANTS 2011–12 TO 2014–15 109 TABLE A1 ALLEGED CONDUCT BREACHES RECORDED BY CATEGORY 2011–12 TO 2014–15 172 TABLE A2 ALLEGED CONDUCT BREACHES RECORDED BY SOURCE 2014–15 173 TABLE A3 FINALISED CONDUCT BREACHES BY CATEGORY 2014–15 174 TABLE A4 CONDUCT BREACHES ESTABLISHED BY TYPE 2014–15 175 TABLE A5 PROHIBITED DRUG TESTS CONDUCTED 2013–14 AND 2014–15 176 TABLE A6 AGE OF COMPLAINTS BEING CARRIED FORWARD TO 2015–16 (ONGOING AS AT 30 JUNE 2015) 177 TABLE A7 RUN TIME FOR RESOLUTION OF COMPLAINTS 177 TABLE B1 MEDIA COSTS DURING 2014–15 178 TABLE C1 ONGOING, NON-ONGOING AND CASUAL STAFF 30 JUNE 2014 AND 30 JUNE 2015 179 TABLE C2 AFP SENIOR EXECUTIVES (SUBSTANTIVE STAFF) 30 JUNE 2015 180 TABLE C3 AFP SENIOR EXECUTIVE PERFORMANCE BONUS PAYMENTS 2014–15 181 TABLE C4 AFP STAFF BY LOCATION AND GENDER 30 JUNE 2015 182 TABLE C5 LENGTH OF SERVICE OF AFP STAFF 30 JUNE 2015 183 TABLE C6 AFP WORKFORCE COMPOSITION 30 JUNE 2015 185 TABLE C7 OUTPOSTING TO OTHER AGENCIES / POLICE SERVICES, SECONDMENTS, TERRITORIES POLICE, PEACEKEEPING/POLICE DEVELOPMENT 30 JUNE 2015 186 TABLE C8 AFP STAFF IDENTIFYING AS ABORIGINAL AND/OR TORRES STRAIT ISLANDER BY SWORN STATUS AND EMPLOYMENT GROUP 30 JUNE 2014 AND 30 JUNE 2015 187 TABLE C9 AFP STAFF IDENTIFYING AS ABORIGINAL AND/OR TORRES STRAIT ISLANDER BY LOCATION AND GENDER 30 JUNE 2015 188 TABLE D1 ENTITY RESOURCE STATEMENT 2014–15 189 TABLE D2 EXPENSES FOR OUTCOME 1 191 TABLE D3 EXPENSES FOR OUTCOME 2 192 TABLE AA1 NATIONAL WITNESS PROTECTION PROGRAM EXPENDITURE 2014–15 208 TABLE AA2 TOTAL EXPENDITURE (BEFORE COSTS WERE RECOVERED) IN PREVIOUS YEARS 208 vi FIGURES FIGURE 1 SNAPSHOT OF ACHIEVEMENTS 2014–15 5 FIGURE 2 ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE AT 30 JUNE 2015 15 FIGURE 3 STAKEHOLDER SATISFACTION WITH THE AFP 2006–2015 (ACROSS OUTCOMES 1 AND 2) 23 FIGURE 4 CONVICTION RATES FOR ALL AFP CASES REACHING COURT AND FINALISED 2008–09 TO 2014–15 24 FIGURE 5 COMMUNITY SATISFACTION WITH AVIATION LAW ENFORCEMENT AND SECURITY 2009–2015 24 FIGURE 6 AFP DRUG HARM INDEX 2008–09 TO 2014–15 26 FIGURE 7 CRIMINAL ASSETS RESTRAINED 2008–09 TO 2014–15 26 FIGURE 8 TREND IN THE NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS AND ASSOCIATED ALLEGED BREACHES 2010–11 TO 2014–15 104 vii 1 COMMISSIONER’S REVIEW AFP ANNUAL REPORT 2014–15 This year for the Australian Federal Police (AFP) has been characterised by challenge and change. Organisational success achieved throughout the year is a testament to the dedication of the AFP work force. The agency diverted significant resources to meet the emerging terrorism threat, arresting 25 persons for terrorism related activity and disrupting a number of alleged planned events. Additionally, the organisation commenced a process of reform to prepare itself for future challenges, signifying the AFP’s willingness to embrace uncertainty and maintain its role at the forefront of Australian national law efforts. There was sustained high operational demand, both overseas and domestically, including: ¢¢The deployment of over 300 personnel to Ukraine, the Netherlands and other European locations to assist in recovering victims from the Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 downed in Ukraine on 17 July 2014. Investigative and forensic personnel continue to contribute to the ongoing international criminal investigation into the incident. ¢¢National security threat level rising to ‘high’ in September 2014, requiring the AFP to review and, where appropriate, adjust its security measures for staff and premises. ¢¢A rapid response to review security arrangements at the Parliament of Australia in late 2014, including an increase in personnel and systems to better protect the facility, its occupants and visitors. ¢¢The deployment in November 2014 of 641 personnel to assist Queensland and Commonwealth authorities in the hosting of the G20 Leaders’ Summit in Brisbane.
Recommended publications
  • The Need for a Rights-Based Public Health Approach to Australian Asylum Seeker Health Jo Durham1* , Claire E

    The Need for a Rights-Based Public Health Approach to Australian Asylum Seeker Health Jo Durham1* , Claire E

    Durham et al. Public Health Reviews (2016) 37:6 DOI 10.1186/s40985-016-0020-9 REVIEW Open Access The need for a rights-based public health approach to Australian asylum seeker health Jo Durham1* , Claire E. Brolan1,2, Chi-Wai Lui1 and Maxine Whittaker1,3 * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract 1Faculty of Medicine & Biomedical Sciences, School of Public Health Public health professionals have a responsibility to protect and promote the right to School of Public Health, The health amongst populations, especially vulnerable and disenfranchised groups, such University of Queensland, Herston as people seeking asylum and whose health care is frequently compromised. As at Road, Herston, Queensland 4006, Australia 31 March 2016, there was a total of 3707 people (including 384 children) in immigration Full list of author information is detention facilities or community detention in Australia, with 431 of them detained for available at the end of the article more than 2 years. The Public Health Association of Australia and the Australian Medical Association assert that people seeking asylum in Australia have a right to health in the same way as Australian citizens, and they denounce detention of such people in government facilities for prolonged and indeterminate periods of time. The position of these two professional organisations is consistent with the compelling body of evidence demonstrating the negative impact detention has on health. Yet in recent years, both the Labour and Liberal parties—when at the helm of Australia’s Federal Government—have implemented a suite of regressive policies toward individuals seeking asylum. This has involved enforced legal restrictions on dissenting voices of those working with these populations, including health professionals.
  • Border Force Partner Bulletin

    Border Force Partner Bulletin

    Partner Bulletin Essential information for Border Force’s partners May 2014 Message from Sir Charles Montgomery As Director General of Border Force I would like to welcome you to the May edition of Border Force Partner e-bulletin. I am committed to Border Force becoming the 'best in the world' and having effective partner engagement is very much at the heart of making this happen. This month Border Force experienced a challenging period in relation to problems at passport control. However this event also demonstrated the positive and essential role Border Force’s partners play in helping to secure our borders. Border Force staff and partners dealt with the situation effectively and professionally in a manner that was promoted positively and widely in media. I personally witnessed staff from both Border Force and partners working together and going the extra mile. I would again like to offer my sincere thanks to you and your staff for their support during this period. This month’s e-bulletin contains useful information about new ePassport technology being rolled out and the new security system that is being developed to keep our borders safe. You can also read more about how this month the Immigration Act received royal assent and how the Government launched a new Maritime Security Strategy. You can also find out more about our key partner meetings held this month, including the new Freight Sector Group and issues affecting the industry. The Partner Bulletin is now available on GOV.UK at Border Force/Publications. Please continue to give us your feedback by emailing the Border Force Partners inbox.
  • Working with the UK Border Agency and Border Force

    Working with the UK Border Agency and Border Force

    This document was archived on 31 March 2016 Working with the UK Border Agency and Border Force archived This document was archived on 31 March 2016 Working with the UK Border Agency and Border Force UKBA works with key partner organisations Important facts Background to address key threats to the UK. These are the threats from: Controlling migration On 1 March 2012 Border Force was split from UKBA to become a separate law • terrorists; The Home Office is responsible for controlling enforcement command, led by its own migration to the UK, through the work of Border Force, Director General, and accountable directly to • criminals enabling illegal immigration which applies immigration and customs controls on Ministers. through fraud, forgery or other passengers arriving at the border, and of the UK Border organised attempts to cheat the Agency (UKBA). UKBA UKBA will protect the border and ensure that immigration system; Britain remains open for business, checking • processes visa applications overseas and people travelling to the UK before they arrive • organised illegal immigration to the applications for further stay from those already through visa checks, intelligence and the use UK; and, in the country, including students, workers, of the e-Borders system. family members and asylum seekers; • a crisis in another country that could At an operational level, Border Force ports lead to false or unfounded claims for • processes citizenship applications; and have local arrangements with the police, in asylum alongside legitimate refugee particular Special Branch, and, in Northern claims. • takes enforcement action against those found Ireland, the C3 Ports Policing Branch, for to be in the UK unlawfully.
  • Stopped at Uk Airport for Warrant

    Stopped at Uk Airport for Warrant

    Stopped At Uk Airport For Warrant Bartolomei panegyrizing incontrollably? If sooth or unrelieved Ajai usually hyperbolizes his chukker seethe spatially or withstand scornfully and profusely, how carangid is Gay? Cymose Doyle never springs so mucking or overpitch any Guarneri transversally. If you are not a citizen, border agents can refuse your entry to the US. GNR arrest two persons for theft after car chase. TSA woman told me she had to feel my bra area. Any case results presented on the site are based upon the facts of a particular case and do not represent a promise or guarantee. How many people leaving britain are stopped at uk airport for warrant was also extended a global entry form coming through passport flagging please enter your state is it is kept strictly confidential information is? Some have it was stopped at uk airport for warrant. Safe use of Internet and Social Media for the Young. HMM, then how did they get passed to get Global Entry? What is defined as a mask? Lucky strike unless allowed back i should have provided for at uk airport? What if i feel great result of a uk including a foot of sentence or redistributed without a walgreens, those who do a stop a better about putting real news was stopped at uk? SOR after I stand trial. You will be playing a lottery as it will be down to the countries discretion to let you in or not. UK, either before arrest on the extradition matter or at any point prior to extradition. On the first on any pending charges were withdrawn, on the second one I received the results I was hoping for and on the third one the results far exceeded any expectations I had and the charges were withdrawn.
  • An International Analysis of Governmental Media Campaigns to Deter Asylum Seekers

    An International Analysis of Governmental Media Campaigns to Deter Asylum Seekers

    International Journal of Communication 14(2020), 1092–1114 1932–8036/20200005 An International Analysis of Governmental Media Campaigns to Deter Asylum Seekers SARAH C. BISHOP1 Baruch College, The City University of New York, USA In recent years, the governments of the United States, Australia, and Norway have developed and launched informational multimedia campaigns targeted at dissuading unwanted groups of asylum-seeking migrants and have disseminated these media in strategic international locales. This project investigates the visual and textual facets of these deterrence campaigns using critical narrative analysis. Asylum seekers globally occupy a precarious liminal position; this article interrogates the processes of governmentality at work in this liminal space. Specifically, I analyze the ways that government-funded deterrence campaigns offer material directives that (1) discursively bifurcate the nature of the threats posed when individuals seek asylum, and (2) omit requisite information about migrants’ human right to seek asylum, thereby advancing strategic ignorance in their audiences. Keywords: immigration, media, global communication, governmentality, migration deterrence There are currently around 3.5 million asylum seekers across the world—the highest number that the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has ever recorded. In Europe, the number of individuals seeking asylum has increased nearly 4,000% in the last decade, and the rate of arrivals is accelerating (Eurostat, 2019). Displaced individuals often flee to neighboring areas, and about 85% of displaced people reside in developing regions that are often unable to provide the material resources and long-term social services necessary for a high-functioning asylum system (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees [UNHCR], 2018b).
  • An Update on Security, Migration, and U.S. Assistance November 2015

    An Update on Security, Migration, and U.S. Assistance November 2015

    An Update on Security, Migration, and U.S. Assistance By Adam Isacson, Senior Associate for Regional Security; Maureen Meyer, Senior Associate for Mexico and Migrant Rights; and Hannah Smith, Program Assistant November 2015 Key Findings migration crackdown has been changes in how migrants are traveling. With decreased possibilities of boarding the train in Chiapas, migrants and smugglers are now relying on different and dangerous routes and modes of transportation, including by foot, vehicle, and boat. These routes expose migrants to new vulnerabilities while simultaneously isolating them from the network of shelters established along traditional routes. Raids and operations to prevent migrants from riding atop cargo trains, known collectively as La Bestia, have been the most visible and aggressive enforcement efforts under the Southern Border Program. Migration authorities have blocked migrants from boarding trains, pulled migrants off of trains, and raided establishments that migrants are known to frequent, detaining thousands. The train operations have prompted concerns about excessive use-of-force and other abuses by the authorities involved. U.S. assistance to help Mexico secure its southern border region has increased, though there is limited transparency regarding dollar values, recipient units, equipment, and training. Additionally, some of the U.S.-donated equipme has seen little use and was reported to be ill-suited for the terrain in this region. For example, U.S.-donated observation towers serve little purpose at the densely forested Mexico-Guatemala border. U.S.-donated biometric data equipment was also observed to be in disuse or only used sporadically. The Southern Border Program brought an increase in mobile checkpoints, and new customs facilities have opened since its launch.
  • Combatting Tax Crimes More Effectively in APEC Economies

    Combatting Tax Crimes More Effectively in APEC Economies

    Combatting Tax Crimes More Effectively in APEC Economies Tax evasion and related financial crime threaten the strategic, political, and economic interests of all countries. Recognising the threat that such illicit financial flows pose to the Asia-Pacific region, APEC Finance Ministers developed the Cebu Action Plan, a road map for a more sustainable Combatting Tax Crimes financial future, calling on all APEC Economies to build their capacity to address financial crimes. To More Effectively in support these efforts, the OECD has developed this report which describes the range of OECD legal instruments, policy tools, and capacity APEC Economies building initiatives available to enhance the fight against tax crime in the Asia-Pacific region, drawing on examples and successful practices in APEC Economies. Combatting Tax Crimes More Effectively in APEC Economies This document, as well as any data and any map included herein, are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area. The opinions expressed and arguments employed herein do not necessarily reflect the official views of the OECD or APEC, or of the governments of their respective member countries. Please cite this publication as: APEC/OECD (2019), Combatting Tax Crimes More Effectively in APEC Economies, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation. www.oecd.org/tax/crime/combatting-tax-crimes-more-effectively-in-apec-economies.htm. Photo credits: Cover © The elements in the main cover illustration were adapted from images courtesy of Shutterstock/r.classen and Shutterstock/Anton Balazh.
  • Smart Border Management an Indian Perspective September 2016

    Smart Border Management an Indian Perspective September 2016

    Content Smart border management p4 / Responding to border management challenges p7 / Challenges p18 / Way forward: Smart border management p22 / Case studies p30 Smart border management An Indian perspective September 2016 www.pwc.in Foreword India’s geostrategic location, its relatively sound economic position vis-à-vis its neighbours and its liberal democratic credentials have induced the government to undertake proper management of Indian borders, which is vital to national security. In Central and South Asia, smart border management has a critical role to play. When combined with liberal trade regimes and business-friendly environments, HIğFLHQWFXVWRPVDQGERUGHUFRQWUROVFDQVLJQLğFDQWO\LPSURYHSURVSHFWVIRUWUDGH and economic growth. India shares 15,106.7 km of its boundary with seven nations—Pakistan, China, Nepal, Bhutan, Myanmar, Bangladesh and Afghanistan. These land borders run through different terrains; managing a diverse land border is a complex task but YHU\VLJQLğFDQWIURPWKHYLHZRIQDWLRQDOVHFXULW\,QDGGLWLRQ,QGLDKDVDFRDVWDO boundary of 7,516.6 km, which includes 5,422.6 km of coastline in the mainland and 2,094 km of coastline bordering islands. The coastline touches 9 states and 2 union territories. The traditional approach to border management, i.e. focussing only on border security, has become inadequate. India needs to not only ensure seamlessness in the legitimate movement of people and goods across its borders but also undertake UHIRUPVWRFXUELOOHJDOĠRZ,QFUHDVHGELODWHUDODQGPXOWLODWHUDOFRRSHUDWLRQFRXSOHG with the adoption of
  • Border Security Report

    Border Security Report

    BORDER SECURITY REPORT VOLUME 24 FOR THE World’s border prOTECTION, MANAGEMENT AND SECURITY INDUSTRY MAY / JUNE 2021 POLICY-MAKERS AND PRACTITIONERS COVER STORY BUILDING BETTER BORDERS IN SOUTHeast ASIA SPECIAL REPORT AGENCY NEWS SHORT REPORT INDUSTRY NEWS An Unholy Alliance: Links A global review of the Fighting trafficking in human Latest news, views and between extremism and illicit latest news and challenges beings p.26 innovations from the trade in East Africa p.14 from border agencies and industry. p.59 agencies at the border. p.36 2 COMMENT contacts EU’s Southern Borders Under Growing Pressure In its monthly report Frontex has impact on this year’s upturn in migrant Editorial: estimated that the number of illegal numbers. Tony Kingham border crossings at Europe’s external Even when Standing Corps reaches E: [email protected] borders has reached 36,100 in the full strength, ten thousand sounds like first four months of 2021. About a third a lot, but if you divide that number into Assistant Editor: higher than a year ago. three or four working shifts, take away Neil Walker This report suggests that last year, routine days off, holidays, sickness, E: [email protected] irregular migration dropped due to paperwork and training courses, you travel limitations linked to the outbreak are probably left with only hundreds Design, Marketing & Production: of COVID. actually working at any one time, Neil Walker rather than thousands. E: [email protected] But given that illegal border crossings are not subject to COVID travel So, ten thousand doesn’t seem Subscriptions: restrictions, this may not be the whole that many, given the size of the EU Tony Kingham story.
  • Global Intelligence Note SUPPLY CHAIN INTELLIGENCE CENTER 11 May 2018 Formerly Known As Freightwatch International

    Global Intelligence Note SUPPLY CHAIN INTELLIGENCE CENTER 11 May 2018 Formerly Known As Freightwatch International

    Global Intelligence Note SUPPLY CHAIN INTELLIGENCE CENTER 11 May 2018 Formerly known as FreightWatch International The SensiGuard™ Supply Chain Intelligence Center (SCIC) presents a summary of major incidents and news articles EMEA relating to cargo theft and intelligence for the week ending 11 May 2018. United Kingdom EMEA United Kingdom .......................................................................1 4 May 2018: Fifty crocodiles have Poland ......................................................................................1 been seized at Heathrow airport after Italy ..........................................................................................2 their transport conditions breached regulations. The year-old reptiles, which arrived on a flight from France ......................................................................................2 Malaysia, had fought each other during the journey due to South Africa..............................................................................2 their cramped circumstances. Each of the five transportation Denmark ..................................................................................3 boxes used had room for four crocodiles, but ten foot-long Switzerland ...............................................................................3 animals were in each one. A Border Force spokesman said “little Saziland/Mozambique ..............................................................3 attention” had been paid to the crocodiles’ welfare. Ghana ......................................................................................3
  • Managing the Risk of Asbestos at the Border

    Managing the Risk of Asbestos at the Border

    Managing the risk of asbestos at the border The health risks posed by exposure to asbestos are well known. An Australia-wide ban on the manufacture and use of all forms of asbestos took effect on 31 December 2003. Work Health and Safety (WHS) laws in all states and territories prohibit the supply and unauthorised transport, use, or handling of asbestos. In order to support the domestic ban: Importing asbestos, or goods containing asbestos, to Australia is prohibited under Regulation 4C of the Customs (Prohibited Imports) Regulations 1956 unless a permission has been granted or a lawful exception applies. Exporting asbestos, or certain goods containing asbestos, from Australia is prohibited under Regulation 4 and Schedule 1 of the Customs (Prohibited Exports) Regulations 1958, unless permission has been granted or a lawful exception applies. Australia is one of the few countries in the Asia/Pacific region that has a comprehensive ban on all six types of asbestos. In many countries, despite the known threat to human health, local standards allow low levels or particular types of asbestos to be used for manufacturing. Goods manufactured outside Australia might be labelled “asbestos free” and still contain low levels of asbestos. Such goods will not be permitted for importation into Australia, except in very limited circumstances. Types of prohibited asbestos Asbestos means the asbestiform varieties of mineral silicates belonging to the following serpentine or amphibole groups of rock forming minerals: actinolite asbestos; grunerite (or amosite) asbestos (brown); anthophyllite asbestos; chrysotile asbestos (white); crocidolite asbestos (blue); tremolite asbestos; or a mixture that contains one or more of the minerals referred above.
  • Refugees Welcome? How Germany, Canada, and Australia Respond to Contemporary Migration

    Refugees Welcome? How Germany, Canada, and Australia Respond to Contemporary Migration

    Refugees welcome? How Germany, Canada, and Australia respond to contemporary migration Doctoral thesis for obtaining the academic degree Doctor of Social Sciences submitted by Lorenz Wiese (né Neuberger) at the Faculty of Politics, Law and Economics Department of Politics and Public Administration Oral examination date: 1.8.2019 1st supervisor: Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Seibel 2nd supervisor: Prof. Dr. Sven Jochem Konstanz, 2019 Konstanzer Online-Publikations-System (KOPS) URL: http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bsz:352-2-1xsrf5ls24wry8 Abstract This dissertation studies how three different liberal democracies; Germany, Canada, and Australia, have experienced and reacted to contemporary migration, focusing on asylum seekers and refugees. Conceptually, it assumes that their admission leads to paradoxes for host states’ governmental apparatuses: If these migrants’ reasons to seek new lives outside of their home countries and regions are recognized, they need to be granted protection statuses and thus be ‘welcomed’ to stay temporarily or permanently. As a consequence of public ‘backlashes’ and anxieties, destination countries’ governments have however increasingly attempted to control and restrict their entry. To understand these phenomena, this study explains the underlying incentives and scopes for handling contemporary migratory movements primarily from a governmental top-down point of view. Historical institutionalism helps to understand the path-dependent emergence of certain policies in the context of each state’s particular actor constellations. Approaches taken from public choice theory are adopted to illuminate the connection between societal sentiments, discourses, and domestic political decision- making. Insights from delegation, blame and signaling games are used to complete this picture. Supplemented by expert interviews, the empirical part of this study deciphers the observable political developments, as well as the resulting administrative asylum/refugee regimes in 21st century Germany, Canada, and Australia.