Brisbane's Citytrain Network
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF QUEENSLAND PARLIAMENTARY TRAVELSAFE COMMITTEE BRISBANE’S CITYTRAIN NETWORK - PART TWO - PASSENGER SECURITY Parliamentary Travelsafe Committee Report No. 24 Released pursuant to Section 4(2)(c) of the Parliamentary Papers Act 1995 (May 1998) PARLIAMENTARY TRAVELSAFE COMMITTEE 48TH PARLIAMENT 2ND SESSION CHAIRMAN: Mr John Goss MLA, Member for Aspley DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Mr Terry Sullivan MLA, Member for Chermside MEMBERS: Mr Bob Dollin MLA, Member for Maryborough Mr John Hegarty MLA, Member for Redlands Mr Rob Mitchell MLA, Member for Charters Towers Mr Bill Nunn MLA, Member for Hervey Bay RESEARCH DIRECTOR: Mr Rob Hansen RESEARCH OFFICER: Miss Amanda Waugh EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT: Miss Catherine Bird BRISBANE’S CITYTRAIN NETWORK - PART TWO PREFACE PASSENGER SECURITY PREFACE One of the committee’s key objectives is to report on measures that will reduce car dependence and enhance public transport provision and usage in Queensland. The fear of crime on public transport is a key factor in declining public transport patronage around the world. As a major element of the public transport system in South East Queensland, the Citytrain rail network has also been affected by this problem. At the commencement of this inquiry, Queensland Rail’s customer surveys indicated that the fear of victimisation was the first or second most common factor in people’s decisions not to travel by Citytrain. It is for these reasons that the committee was keen to examine the issue of personal safety on the Citytrain network. This report seeks to identify the true extent of crimes on the network, public perception of the level of crime and the factors which fuel these perceptions. It also examines various approaches to crime prevention, both international and national, and the efficacy of the methods currently employed by Queensland Rail. The committee paid special attention to the use of Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) surveillance and policing of the network. To identify the true extent of crime on the network, the committee examined statistics on crimes involving passengers on the railway. This was obtained through searches of the Queensland Police Service Crime Reporting Information System for Police (CRISP) database for the period 1 July 1994 to 31 December 1997. These statistics suggest that the risk to passengers of being assaulted on the Citytrain network is extremely low and declining. For a regular commuter who travels 480 trips on the network annually (ten trips weekly for 48 weeks per year), the risk of being assaulted, on average, is once every 528 years. However, the statistics do reveal that certain groups are at greater risk than others and that the risk of assault is higher at certain times. The committee found that high school aged children between the ages of 12 and 18 were most at risk. 54 percent of reported assaults during the period examined were against people in this age group. Similarly, most of the assaults reported to police were committed by children of high school age. The committee notes that Queensland Rail and the police need to examine methods of reducing altercations amongst this age group on the Citytrain network. The committee was encouraged to learn that for the vast majority of travellers on the network the risk of being assaulted is very low, and questioned why the public perceives the Citytrain network as unsafe. It seems that these perceptions are at least partially attributable to the effects of sensationalised media reporting of isolated crimes and the lack of public information on the true extent of crime on the network. Other factors likely to affect people’s perceptions of the Citytrain network include the cleanliness of trains and stations, the presence of graffiti and exposure to rowdy or offensive groups. The committee recommends that Queensland Rail regularly publishes information on the crime prevention measures it has in place and continues to address minor incivilities, such as graffiti, to create a positive image of care and safety on Citytrain. Having identified the types of crime committed on the network and where, when and against whom they were committed, the committee examined the crime prevention measures Queensland Rail and other railways have implemented, and their results. The committee was disappointed to discover that Queensland Rail could not produce reliable data on the incidence of crime on the network, nor demonstrate that it undertook a thorough analysis of crime on the network before major prevention measures were implemented. Having said this, it is likely that Queensland Rail’s crime prevention initiatives have played a major part in reducing crime on the Citytrain network. The committee was generally encouraged by Queensland Rail’s efforts to improve station environments, including making BRISBANE’S CITYTRAIN NETWORK - PART TWO PREFACE PASSENGER SECURITY car parks more secure, installing better lighting at stations, running Guardian Trains with enhanced security in the evenings and providing emergency help phones at stations. These measures need to be properly evaluated to determine their effectiveness and where and to what degree further improvements should be made. Queensland Rail’s introduction of CCTV surveillance to improve security is a good example. Like other railways in Australia, Queensland Rail has invested heavily in CCTV to monitor its stations, car parks and trains. Anecdotal evidence from Queensland Rail and its staff who work the railway, suggests that the cameras are an effective crime deterrent. The committee was encouraged by this, though notes that CCTV was implemented by Queensland Rail at the same time it implemented other security initiatives on Citytrain. As far as the committee could determine, the crime prevention value of CCTV remains unproven. Given that Queensland Rail is investing in excess of $10.5 million in CCTV, the committee recommends that the use of this security technology on the Citytrain network be independently evaluated. The committee examined how the Citytrain network is policed and the roles of the various groups responsible for providing security: Queensland Rail’s officers who are authorised under the Transport Operations (Passenger Transport) Act 1994 to enforce railway offences; the Police Rail Squad and other police; and private security guards. The committee concludes that there is some confusion over the roles, powers and authorities of the various groups involved in providing a secure network. It recommends that overlapping roles be resolved and that the Government review the scope for appointing authorised officers for railways. The committee believes a clearer demarcation of responsibilities between the Police Rail Squad and Queensland Rail will improve each group’s effectiveness. A visible policing presence on the network is important and the current staffing levels in the Police Rail Squad should also be reviewed. On the whole, the committee was very impressed by the priority being given by Queensland Rail, the Queensland Police Service and Queensland Transport to the security of passengers on the Citytrain network. Significant, highly visible improvements have been made during the committee’s inquiry that benefit passengers. The committee encourages people to re-consider their travel options in the greater Brisbane area and to choose to use the Citytrain network more often. The peopling of the network is an effective crime prevention strategy in itself. Increasing train trips and reducing trips by private motor vehicles also contributes to a more efficient transport system and a sustained quality of life in South East Queensland into the next century. Finally, I would like to thank the people and organisations who assisted the committee with this inquiry. I commend this report to the House. Mr John Goss MLA Chairman BRISBANE’S CITYTRAIN NETWORK - PART TWO TABLE OF CONTENTS PASSENGER SECURITY TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO. TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................... I LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES ................................................................................V ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................................... VII SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................IX PART 1 ~ INTRODUCTION................................................................................................1 THE TRAVELSAFE COMMITTEE ...................................................................................................... 1 BACKGROUND AND SCOPE OF THE INQUIRY ................................................................................... 1 SCOPE OF THIS REPORT.................................................................................................................. 2 INQUIRY PROCESS.......................................................................................................................... 2 RESPONSIBILITY OF MINISTERS ...................................................................................................... 3 PART 2 ~ THE CITYTRAIN NETWORK..........................................................................5 PART 3 ~ PERSONAL SAFETY AND SECURITY ON CITYTRAIN............................7 SOURCES OF DATA ON CRIME ON RAILWAYS ................................................................................. 7 POLICE STATISTICS ON REPORTED CRIMES ...................................................................................