An Evaluation of the Queensland Security Providers Act: Implications for National Regulation of the Protective Security Industry
| DOI | 10.1177/000486589903200107 |
| Published date | 01 April 1999 |
| Date | 01 April 1999 |
An Evaluation
of
the Queensland
Security
Providers
Act: Implications for
National Regulation
of
the Protective
Security Industry
Tim Prenzler and Hennessey Hayes
Griffith
University
The expansion of protective security services in the last few
decades
has
raised concerns about the privatisation of policing and accountabil-
ity
of
'non-police' law enforcement
agencies.
One response by govern-
ments
has
been
to
enlarge regulatory controls
of
the industry. A recent
example is the
Queensland
SeQJrity
ProvidersAet
I993.This paper reports on
a study designed
to
obtain insiders' views on the impact
of
the Act. A
survey
of
security
managers
revealed
scepticism about the
success
of
the
legislation in reducing misconduct and improving competency amongst
security providers. Respondents felt the licensing
system
was
too
narrow
and enforcement
too
weak
to
upgrade the industry
to
the
desired
standard - although there was some support
for
improved entry-level
standards as a result
of
minimum training requirements. Strong support
was expressed
for
a range of reform
measures
including comprehensive
licensing
of
all industry sectors linked
to
a national
system,
improved train-
ing and
assessment,
frequent criminal history checks on licensees, more
vigorous compliance monitoring, and compulsory insurance and monitor-
ing
of
firms for award payments.A cooperative approach
to
regulation and
national co-ordination
of
the statesand territories is
needed
to
implement
these measures in
order
to
improve standards
of
service delivery in
security
work
and protect the public interest.
Protective
security,
policing
and
regulation
The
development of
the
security industry in Australia has followed
an
international
pattern of substantial growth from
the
1970s
through
the
19808
(George &
Button
This is a project funded by a grant from the Australian
Criminology
Research
Council.
The
views expressed are those of the authors and are
not
necessarily those of the Council.
The
authors would like to
thank
the Council for its support for the project. We would also like to
thank Dr Richard Wortley for his advice on aspects of the paper.
Address
for
correspondence:
Tim
Prenzler,
School
of
Criminology
and Criminal
Justice,
Griffith
University,
NathanQLD
4111,
Australia.
THEAUSTRALIAN
AND
NEW
ZEALAND JOURNAL OF CRIMINOLOGY
VOLUME
32
NUMBER
I 1999
PP.
79-94
79
~o
TIM
PRENZLERAND
HENNESSEY
HAYES
1997). Security providers now outnumber conventional police in Australia by about
three
...
to
...
one. In 1997/98 there were approximately 42,000 police officers
and
92,000
security licence holders,
but
unlicensed categories could account for up to one third
of the industry (Prenzler &Sarre 1998).
With
the
increased use of security guards in
public areas such as shopping malls, sports stadiums and educational facilities it can
be said
that
security personnel have become almost ubiquitous (Stenning 1994).
Historically,
the
security industry in Australia, as in most liberal democracies, has
been
'regulated' by
criminal
law,
company
and
other
civil laws, as well as some
tokenistic
licensing
of
private
investigators, process servers
and
security guards
(Johnston 1992; Sarre 1998).
The
inadequacies of this market
...
dominated system of
regulation have become apparent with
the
growth of
the
industry and exposure of a
range of problems
and
issues. From left
...
wing
and
civil libertarian perspectives,
the
industry has been critiqued in terms of
the
privatisation of justice (O'Malley 1994;
Swanton 1993).
That
is to
say,
the
expansion of security services entails a fundamen
...
tal shift from state provision of crime
prevention
and
law enforcement services to
forms of 'seIf
...
provision'
of
security
and
adoption of 'user pays' principles (Johnston
1992).
At
the
most basic level, this means
that
those who are able to pay receive
better
protection,
thus
compounding inequalities in society
and
commercialising
what
could be considered basic rights to safety
and
security.
The
privatisation of
security also meshes
with
a'neo
...
liberal' shift away from social factors in
the
diagnosis
of causes of crime to individualised sources of 'rational choice'. This entails a shift in
crime prevention practices away from social justice initiatives towards target harden
...
ing, access control,
the
creation of enclave housing, and forms of selective exclusion
of people from public use areas of private property. In this process, scrutiny of due
process procedures is difficult to maintain. For example, security guards in shopping
malls have
been
criticised for
the
harassment of marginalised social groups, such as
young people, and disregard for their legal rights
(White
and
Sutton
1995).
In
policy terms,
the
above critiques support a range of public
...
sector responses to
crime
which
run
counter
to
privatisation.
These
include initiatives such as commu
...
nity
policing,
poverty
reduction,
parent
support
programs,
alternative
school
curriculums,
and
employment
and
life skills programs for young people. However,
even
with
the
large
...
scale
implementation
of
such
programs,
the
demand
for
security services is
unlikely
to
abate
to a
point
where questions
about
industry
accountability
and
regulation become marginal.
The
potential
for misconduct in
security remains high, regardless of
the
size of
the
industry, because of
the
position
of trust
and
privileged knowledge security providers
hold
in relation to
their
clients
(Shapiro 1987).
The
last decade has witnessed some
damning
exposes
of
miscon
...
duct
and
crime in security work
through
a series of inquiries
and
investigations.
These
have
included assaults by crowd controllers
and
neglect of
patron
protection,
fraudulent
misrepresentation
of
security
patrol
and
alarm
monitoring
services,
police
'moonlighting'
as security staff,
corruption
between
public officials
and
security providers, wastage of police resources
responding
to faulty alarms,
and
under
...
award payments to security employees (Prenzler 1998).
The
most
determined
governmental responses relating to
conduct
of
security
personnel
have
occurred
between
1995
and
1997
with
new
legislation in
South
Australia (Security and Investigation Agents
Act
1995)
Western
Australia (Security
THE
AUSTRALIAN
AND NEW
ZEALAND
JOURNALOF CRIMINOLOGY
To continue reading
Request your trial