Empowering the Security Industry

Kia Ora,

I am still livid over the events of Sunday morning. Currently there is an investigation going into the killing of the taxi driver in Auckland & a review of taxi driver safety.

But this was done after the stabbing & murder of the driver here in Christchurch.

At the time of that incident I contacted the taxi federation & independant taxi companies here in Christchurch to see if they wanted someone to brief the drivers on bodyarmour. I know quite a few have purchased stab vests  armour from army surplus stores but much it was next to useless. So I thought as they are going to purchse it anyway then it would be a good idea for them to know what to look for.

I never heard back from any of the independent companies despite pointing out it was not a sales pitch, but passing on what I had learnt.

Did hear from the taxi federation who put it all in independents & had no interest. Despite the fact that it was many of its members staff who on finding out that I had bodyarmour had being asking about buying some.

The same with security industry. As one operations manager once said "security is only unskilled labour". Our reply he was the only unskilled labour there. In fact that was why he was the operations manager as he was a yes man. Has no idea about actual security.

I hear where they are currently based advice hasn't changed. Don't look for cirme & ignore it or suspicious activity especially if it is not on your clients property.

In other words he has no idea about security.

For private companies buying body armour is expensive & OSH actually caters for that by saying if you can afford it. But it also says you must have procedures to mitigate the danger if equipment not able to be purchased.

Again it comes back to risk assessment & risk awareness then risk management. Not risk management written in a nice folder that no one ever reads or are aware off.

You get asked but aren't you scared. Well actually no, we just react & I don't think either of us were scared on Sunday morning but we reacted as experience told us too.

You expect danger, but you also expect to be able to deal with it in a safer manner.

The other company had more guards on site because their client is a bit more aware of their responsiblities. It is a constant battle to get clients to agree to what should be the minimum number of security on site.

It is about time politicians pulled their finger & got real about this country. Funny how the party that has made it worse over last decade are now accsuing the others of letting it get out of hand. To them it is all a game. To me whilst I am confident of handling the situtations that confront me, it is about the lives of people in an industry that is just not up to standard.

The Full Moon

Kia Ora,

Well a Full Moon last night & its effect on people was plain to see & hear. But the incident that really got me was about 0325.

This morning the news is of the taxi driver stabbed in Auckland. Well like taxi drivers no one really cares about the safety of security personnel.

First a correction on the previous blog. The guards from the company next to where I was working had once the more experienced guard came on being stationed outside.

Last night I could say I am probably lucky they were there.

Tomorrow I will be talking to an OSH inspector on how we can change things. If I put in a formal complaint then the people who get fined are not the clients who refuse to put extra guards on, but the security company I was contracted too, who do tell the clients there should be more guards.

Last night there were drunks, idiots & just general crime all over. We learnt that by someone having a scanner & by following the police sirens continously moving around the city.

What has really got me upset was what transpired at 0325.

Everytime we do these overnights we attempt to add another guard as one person on their own just doesn't cut it.

As luck would have it, one of the guards from the other company called over for a chat & it was as we were talking I noticed a group of 10 pers approaching.

He warned out his mates & we got in position to observe. Two of the group were out in front & we were expecting drunks, but got two young males who one then proceded to tip over a porta loo. They were challenged & made to stand it back up.

As that was happening we both suddenly heard a noise & noticed the other 8 had caught up. They were standing a bit back, one clearly had an iron bar in his hand & another could be heard tapping a bar against a light pole.

What happened next was only due to the luck of having the other guard being there at that time. He called his off siders on the radio & I called the police.

It was the fact that they could not tell how many of us there were was only reason they appeared to dispose of their bars in the small lake then come back through along the foot path & run in towards town.

About half an hour later four of these characters came back along another track & tried to break into cars.

Now if it hadn't being just luck of the other guard being there for a chat it could of ended very differently.

I had as a bit of a joke taken my Level 4 bodyarmour from Iraq along, as well as the riot helmet I keep in a bag for encounters with the boy racers. The Police communications wanted all the security to stay in close to each other, but we had different tasks so until first light I wore the level four & carried the riot helmet.

If clients can't be bothered doing the risk assessment then I don't care how silly it looks.

But not everyone has the equipment I have or even the soft armour as "we don't need it in NZ".

I want someone to tell that to the family of the next security person killed whilst working.

Luckily the client was late & I had talked to the company I was contracting too or else they were going to get a rocket so strong they would of being the first man on mars.

Same old thing.

Kia Ora,

Just in from an overnight stint. Had another security company working on adjoining piece of turf. Two shifts of two pers. One was someone that had carried out a bit of security & was regular, the next guy when he could & the other two just to earn some extra coin after their day job.

On arrival go to touch base with the first two & their most pressing concern was getting power to their portacom so they could turn the light on.

Any soldier off basic training knows that you can actually see out if you leave the lights off & people can't see you.

Then there were torches everywhere. An old sergeant of mine once said "if someone is shining a torch for no real reason then they are scared. If they didn't have the lights on in the portacom they could of walked around with out using their torches.

Not their fault though as they would of picked that up off others. Having worked for that company they were actually some of the better ones I have seen. Good People, good earnest & doing the best they can, but it needs to be better.

Taste of Things to come!

Kia Ora,

Well the last week & in particular the last few days are showing a taste of things to come.

We have had 2500 job applicants for 160 jobs. What has this to do with security?

About 18 months ago an ex army mate returned from the US talking about how out of touch NZ was & how this was happening in US. At the same time as people were loosing their jobs crime was going up.

Prior to Xmas last year there was the usual rise in the number of armed robberies, but it was happening in clusters which seemed unusual. Two to three a day in one area of the country then same next day in another area. Almost like the bodysnatchers were saying today we hit Hamiliton, tomorrow Christchurch.

Well after being quiet for a while in the last two days there have being four armed robberies, but these have being spread across the country & either very young people or hitting small town/rural areas.

As the economy gets harder for people to make ends meet, this trend will continue to grow, yet again most in the industry will not want to know or even carry out basic risk assessment.

It is not about money for drugs anymore, it is going to be more about just living. Thre forecast is in the US the middle class is going to get hit hardest & therefore have to resort to things they have no idea about.

Emotions will be higher & so things are more likely to go wrong.

It also means that just in small things people are going to have to be more aware.

Try this. Walk around a car park & see what is open to view despite years of warnings.

Cough medicine (possible to use some for manufacture of P), wallets, cash, lap tops, plane tickets, passports, rates bill (giving your address- steal your car then break into your house using your car to transport it) & these are just some of the things you will see in the first maybe 10 cars you look at.

If you own or work in a store the chances of robbery are going to increase. Often store keepers I know ask what they can do.

Each time I tell them one simple deterrent but no one has used it yet. Correction one after years of telling them have used a variant.

It has being used overseas where you place at the entrance to your store a TV  & the first thing people see as they walk in is a large picture of themself. It has being known to put off people wearing a balaclava over their face.

Why don't people do it? Because they want to use that space to put more items on to sell & besides it will never happen to them.

Yeah Right!

The Kiwi Mindset

Kia Ora,

The Kiwi mindset towards security & in particular the lack of risk assessment you meet in all walks of life.

Occassionally I get emails about tenders. One to a government department interested me as it was for body armour & since my company owns a few sets for hire I thought I would look at it.

Suffice to say my comments forwarded to the department were in the main not well taken even though I was not going to tender.

First point I had was as part of the military I had had an association with this department & a true risk assessment would show that all those that had what would be classed as front line duties should be wearing at least a stab vest. Not the significantly less numbers for use when required they were asking for. It there is a threat then they are required to be worn at all times as you just never know when the threat will arise.

Basically they had put out a tender that was a replica of what the police are now wearing.

Next point I made was both from an economic point of view & protection point of view that was inadequate as police vests are only ballistic rated to equivalent toNIJ (National Institute of Justice) level II. Though higher in stab rating. Though each brand is different a level II rating usually only lasts five years where as a level IIIA lasts ten years & has a higher ballistic rating. Which Leads onto their next point of some being able to be level III as some risks they had identified meant people could be fired on. So they had carried out a partial risk assessment. But to be level three rated means it is the plate plus level IIIA inserts. Having level II inserts & adding a plate does not give someone level III. Companies in Iraq were caught out doing that as well & the ratings must be current.

They then wanted a similar shirt to the police. Now that shirt is likely to Breach OSH.

Yes it is cool when wearing the armour, but is it fireproof.

This comes about because of incidents in Iraq. The British due to lessons learnt over the years used cotton T shirts as being a natural fibre it doesn't burn as easy.

There was a product which many of us bought called underarmour (good for cycling etc, but is it good under body armour.

One day I received a call from my old army mate 'swampy' "Bro you got underarmour?"

"Yes but I don't wear it we use cotton T shirts."

"Well we have just being hit by an IED. All OK, but flash over has set one of teams underarmour on fire underneath his body armour. He is badly burnt. It has just melted".

So what does that have to do with police shirts or even security in NZ?

If as I suspect those shirts are synthetic & most T shirts are at most a combination of cotton & synthetic's these days then the most likely people, other than firemen, to go into a fire situation are those likely to be wearing body armour & the heat could set this material off or melt it.

That is but one example of the NZ government departments attitude to risk assessment & security.

Staff safety, not an issue.

So if that is the officials take on it then how can the privte security industry turn it around to show that they do it better.

Start doing Risk assessments. But most would have no idea how to do it properly.

Probably the best one I ever heard was from an officer in the army when instructing on a command course. He said think of the worst case ever that you could come across & plan for it.

He then painted a scenario of a four man patrol going to check a knoll. He asked for worst case scenario from the course.

Our thinking because of size of that piece of ground instead of enemy patrol, maybe a platoon dug in. 

His was way over anything we had ever imagined. An enemy company getting ready to attack backed by tanks.

Plan for the most unlikely event. In fact OSH rules say if you don't identify it as a threat you don't have to plan for it ( & NZ tends to stop thinking after this), but it then goes onto say that if you should of identified it even if it has never happened to you before then you are liable for prosecution. So a catch 22 situation.

To me it is better to have planned for the way out scenario instead of running around when it happens trying to make things up as you go.

Cleaning up

Kia Ora,

What am I a cleaning up? Just some loose ends before giving an example of a government department who doesn't know how to carry out risk assessements.

First thanks to Mr O'Neills response. Yes that is how it is. How do I know because that was what I was told when I suggested OSH just show up to check out security.

Each Weekend there are hundreds, probably thousands of injuries received by security (mainly in hospitality) but no one calls in OSH as it is just another good  "work out" as I heard someone once describe it. Even minor injuries or potential issues whould be at least recorded. Not likely & even regular staff will be lucky to get ACC if off work.

But as our old mate Swampy keeps saying "If security are going to be professional then OSH & acts like it are actually empowering" or words to that effect. It is just the industry at present doesn't have the vision to see it.

Then we come back to the NZ mindset on security. After all the upset over those photos the "Press" in its  Monday editorial says "in our opinion we did not put anyone in more danger" or words to that effect.

Wake up! of course you did. Not just the guys on the ground, but their families (don't assume there are no people in sympathy with the Terrorists here in NZ) & the upset for their families.

Then there is the pouncing on the comments by the CDS as a reprimand of one of the persons involved. Not the words I heard or have seen quoted at all. He was spoken too about being more careful of revealing his idenity. Yet again the media twist it to make it look like they are the good guys.

Though my contact with the CDS was fleeting in an infantry unit, his straight forward approach & sense of humour (at my expense I must add) impressed me as a young soldier.

To Twist his words over this affair just shows how the media in this country views the military & their lack of security awareness over this issue is just a joke.

You see it all the time when they pay the lip service to ANZAC, then it is you have had your day we don't want to know about what you do or how you have being affected.

Health & Safety

Kia Ora,

Had a call yesterday to carry out some sub contract security work. Good people to work for  & they are always looking to improve.

But as it is an overnight task in a dodgy area (what part of Christchurch isn't these days?) the one question I asked was "Suppose only one on site in breach of OSH again?". Of course.

The conversation went along the lines that no matter how he puts it clients don't think it warrants a second person.

We then moved onto the event proper.  It seems the police were concerned about the low number of security & made the comment that there must be a minimum number you have to have. It was pointed out that yes there is an international standard, but since it is not enshrined in law here in NZ, the clients basically often set the numbers (more often than not).

Now this is where a security consultant that would be well known to many of my ex army comrades has repeatedly made a point.

Health & Safety is empowering to the Security industry but they have to open their eyes to it.

Other issue there is unless the industry as a whole agrees to it then it won't work. That is the issue facing the people I subcontract too. They do their best, but if they push it too much they will just loose the work.

In other countries it has had to be put in law, but our politicians are out of touch or too corrupt to actually do anything until someone gets killed. So as we used to say in the army they are a waste of rations or an oxygen thief.

The other ways this can be enforced or improved is through the insurance industry.

This is nothing but a rort. If you have liability insurance for you business in this country you will find that it doesn't cover you for what it should. The questionaire they send out each year at renewal time does not require security to be actually providing security & therefore lessoning the possibility of a claim.

It is interesting that Warren Buffet, the worlds greatest investor who wealth is mainly in insurance companies, does not give his directors liabliity insurance because he says it makes them lazy.

Same thing in security industry here. People are too lazy to do security properly because they think their insurance will cover them.

The next group are the Department of Labour Health & Safety Inspectors.

They have the right to enter any place of work, but they can't go unless there has being a complaint.

Now someone has said to me that since basically every task i have done is in breach of Health & Safety, & I have my own security company, then I should complain. Only thing is this then impacts on the persons company I am subcontracting too & the people whom they employ.

I have said to them though that should I get assaulted then I will lay a complaint, since we both raise these issues constantly. The only way for clients to get the message is for them to be prosecuted. There was an incident right at the end of last year where a person was threatening bodily harm. Now since there was only me, instead of the 7 guards there should of being to secure the premise, it was a breach of OSH. Had they being called it would of closed an event that would of cost probably millions.

As part of an OSH review I have put forward, as have many of the other attendees, that inspectors should be allowed to go on any work site at any time as they are aware of issues in industries, but cannot act without a complaint.

Funny thing was that people attending that meeting were people that could see were OSH was a plus when used correctly.

But yet again it falls to the Police to look at imposing conditions. I am sure they often wonder why if there is security on site, why they are getting called. But one guard for a thousand people doesn't mean much.

Risk Assessment doesn't mean you don't do anything or put you in a negative mindset. In fact if it is part of your culture as it is in the military then it can be very positive.

In fact that is all what soldiering is about. You plan for the what if's & it puts you half way towards dealing with anything thrown at you.

That was why ex military pers do so well in Iraq & Afghanistan. All it is is risk Assessment as opposed to Risk Management. It is very fluid risk assessment based on information gleaned from intelligence reports (OK military inteligence is an oxymoron at times but you do get useful information occassionally), people on the streets, other mates by phone (that is a very Iraq thing, as soon as something happens the phones are going passing it on) & again from those reports, what has happened in the past. Based on that calls over radio would often go "dead dog right, car left, tyre left, box middle, guy on bridge with phone, car stopping on bridge". all part of the risk assessment due to the right culture.

Just as easy to do it in security.

Again I go back to someone who wasn't ex military but got his qualifications in Britain. In Britain an event is planned around the security professionals plan. Even the police take their que from them (An Aussie consultant has told me that for most events the same happens there now).

Where as in NZ it is more often than not, if security are even involved in the planning, it is all decided & then as an after thought at the end of the meeting it is "Oh security you got anything?"

This approach will not be acceptable at the world cup or likely any future events in the not too distant future.

During submissions on the new security personnel bill an MP told me that things will be up to standard by the world cup due to special legislation.

Why do we need special legislation just for one event when it whould be at that standard all the time?

I also seriously doubt whether it will be up to standard by that time as first & foremost there needs to be a serious mindset change not only amongst the security industry but the NZ public as well in regards to security.


I still can't see why people should basically put their lives on the line for low pay & shit conditions, when even their basic Health & Safety is not considered.

Ground hog Day

Kia Ora,

No matter what crime goes down here in NZ it seems our selective memories ignore the worst, very quickly.

It seems like Ground Hog day to me. I have being contacted by someone wanting to move to NZ & in particular Christchurch & they have being looking at properties. They asked about certain suburbs being good. I informed them no. A mate says but that one is really good, it is not like it used to be. This is despite the fact that in last year there have being gruesome murders discovered right on the street he said was changed. Same with the other suburb he said was OK.

You get the same when you mention terrorism. "Oh but it will never happen here". What was the rainbow warrior, Wanganui computer bombing, trade union  building bombing or everyday interaction with organized crime.

We could have a suicide bombing & I believe I would still hear Kiwis say it will never happen here.

It is the same when you are talking about crime. Everybody has a story of how crime is getting worse in NZ or their city, but when you say well this area is bad at present. "Not in my area! We never have crime" & this will be not five minutes after they have told me of an incident not only in their area, but often on their property.

As several immigrants have said & I seem to keep repeating this. "Lovely country, laid back lifestyle, but kiwis live in a bubble & one day soon it is going to be burst".

Instead of ignoring it & hoping it would go away people need to take control. Only then will we get on top of this cirme wave that keeps getting bigger & bigger.

Two examples of when people have ignored crime or unruly behaviour are two shootings by police.

The first would be the Waitara shooting several years back. Not only did family earlier ring the police then hang up, but they then did nothing when he left their property still upset. Then suddenly the police shoot him quite justifiably in my opinion & it is all the police fault.

No the responsibility lay first with the individual then with the whanau. Yes, the police made mistakes, but they wouldn't of being in that situation had others taken on themselves to intervene first.

The second was even worse. The Stanmore road shooting here in Christchurch. It transpired that the individual concerned had being acting out of character by taking Herbals, smoking marijuana & not sleeping for three days, but his 'friends' only did something when he attacked their property by calling the police. They then had the gall to blame the police. Only people at fault here apart from the individual was his so called 'friends'.

I have it on good authority that the police officre involved was the one officer in Christchurch that at that time could of disarmed the individual if anyone could, if he had being able too.

Yes the officer breached SOP's, but SOP's are only ever a guideline unless it requires the law to be broken.

It is time for the country to wake up.

Those Photos!

Kia ora,

 Well the NZ apathy to all aspects of security strikes again.

In publishing the photos of the Aghanistan incident not only do they put the soldiers under threat, but also their families.

Only someone divorced from the real world would believe that there are no Al Qaeda or Taliban sympathizers not here in NZ. But then there are a lot of people here in NZ divorced from reality full stop.

The Christchurch 'Press' for one should know better as they got a rocket from me for publishing an article which in part was about me when I first went to Iraq in 2004. It was pointed out to them that not only were they highly off the mark in their reporting, nearly lost me my contract, but also they put my family in danger as well as worrying them when they weren't before.

It would of being the same for the soldiers families. In particular once one of them at least was identified. Calls from the media when the whanau aren't even aware something is up is extremely upsetting.

In my case the chain of events had started when someone breahed the privacy act by using my details for a purpose for which they were not given.

It defies belief that after all that has happened over the last ten years, that the NZ media has not learnt one thing about personal security.

From the messages I have being seeing & getting there is a real sense of anger amongst the military & ex military community in NZ. Good on the ex Captain for taking the media to task this morning.

Time for NZ & the media here to get up to play with the real world.

Prince Williams security is compromised & it is treated as a joke.

Then this happens. As many an immigrant has said to me when discussing the security industry in NZ. "Lovely place, like the laid back lifestyle, but NZ lives in a bubble & one day soon it is going to get a wake up call.

Time for the country to wake up & grow up.

Lets put it all in the police basket.

Kia Ora,

Well this morning an article that really gets my blood boiling. We have groups set up to help people like those with mental illness, but when it all goes wrong the head lines read "Police .....".

One of the reasons I have seen the police do less & less actual old style policing is the other issues that end up on their lap.

For example when dealing with mental health patients here in NZ once told by a designated mental health worker under the Mental Health act 1992 to remain in place to watch over a person under assessment, the police must do so.

When working security in a major NZ hospital I have actually seen this at its worst. Two police officers arrived in with this individual & whilst he was awaiting assessment by psych emergency, a call came over their radios for assistance by another officer.

As they had not being ordered to remain I said I would watch over him. Then if they hadn't assessed him within half an hour we would call in a patient watch guard which would come out of psych emergencies budget.

It almost worked. The police were about to move out when one of the staff came out, realized what was going on & ordered them to remain under the mental health act.

It was farcical. Here were two officers who you could see were wanting to go back up their mate (as any good police, military or security person does), but due to bureaucracy they were hamstrung.

Just another area that has landed in the police lap were maybe private security could carry it out as a specialized task. This would free up police for policing. There are so many areas where this could apply.

But instead it is thrown at the police, who then have to priortise as best they can, & they then get the blame when something goes wrong.

Risk Assessment

Kia Ora,

Ok so there was one other thing going on in NZ security wise yesterday, but I thought I would leave that until today.

That was the breach at Premier house at Prince Williams BBQ.

Again it comes back to the NZ mindset or as a health & safety inspector said to me in discussion on this topic. NZ is all about risk management. As I said "yes but before you do that you need to do a risk assessment or have a risk assessment culture & that is the next thing needed in the security industry.

It showed during that breach that no risk assessment of even a basic level had being carried out of possible actions by protest groups or others. Not only that like most security situations in NZ it would of being in breach of health & safety but until there is a complaint then nothing will change. That is an issue as well as if a company complains the client is likely to go elsewhere to someone who doesn't want to comply.

As one former army comrade & now security consultant said.

"If the NZ security industry actually looked at Health & Safety it is empowering to the industry. But they all have to buy into it".

To comply fully with Health & Safety means more staff, more work & greater cash flow.

Again come back to the Prince William situation & a proper Rish Assessment would of had private security covering those areas suspect to breach & have ensured that the police were able to carry out their assigned duties.

Risk Assessment is one of the most basic issues confronting security, yet it is not done.

People tend to pander to the way the current Health & Safety Legisaltion is written. If you don't identify the threat  or risk then you don't have to cover for it.

But it is a catch 22 situation because if something does happen & on investigation it is found you should of identified it then you are liable.

Compare that to the military idea which is to cover the worst scenarios you can think of with actions on, then plan for best outcome. It means even if something outside your thinking happens all are already in the mindset to morph their actions to fit. 

As one section commander from Vietnam said "If you have a positive action even if it is wrong, then it is better than standing like stunned mullets" or words to that effect.

A strength should be to have a successful outcome, but still be able to look & say well actually that response is wrong, we will change it for next time.

There must be serious questions now (in my mind there already were) over being able to hold the Rugby World Cup 2011 in NZ, unless there are drastic changes in Risk assessment practices & the mindset of at least the NZ police & security industry.

So there is no threat?

Kia Ora,

Are you sure? Two things in todays news here in NZ.

The first is people leaving an armed robbery in a stolen car fired on a pursuing police car.

That might not seem much overseas, but here where police are still officially unarmed it shows that even with an unarmed force & security people are still prepared to shoot.

When I mentioned arming of security it gets odd looks. It is not well known that until 1974 security in NZ was armed, but the police were not since the late 1800's when they were known as the armed constabulary.

Honestly I wouldn't arm most of the current security work force with a ball point pen, but there has to be provision for some to be armed Security.

That brings me on to the second news item. Splashed across the worlds media is firefights (gun battles) between Afghan forces & Al Qaeda with allegedly NZ Special forces involved.

This brings up interesting points.

First whether NZ was involved or not it brings our name yet again to attention of those groups who will note it for further interest.

The second point is the tactics. Suicide bomber, in this case shot by security at ministries backed by armed Personnel. Just repeating tactics used in Iraq. Either armed assault followed by suicide bombers trying to get in further or suicide bombers followed by armed assault & more suicide bombers.

All you have to do in most cases in NZ is identify the holes in security & walz through.

As it is going to happen here at some point there needs to be a move towards arming some security & not just any body. If you are dealing with suicide bombers then it has to be people prepared to shoot to kill. That might seem extreme but it is not about looking good with a firearm & at best they should be out of view anyway.

You can't stop someone & ask if they are a suicide bomber (although I would expect that would be NZ's response at present).

People say but it is the police or the army that will be doing that. They have set roles & to let them carryout those roles, private security (properly trained in the legal use of firearms -military BHE's work best with ROE's -Rules of Engagement) allow them to do this.

What needs to happen 1!

Kia Ora,

I began writing these blogs to express my frustrations with the security industry in NZ.

But I  think I should outline what needs to happen to bring the industry up to a standard that is acceptable.

First is the training. Currently there is no requirement for any training & under the proosed changes there will still be no real requirement for real training. Most of what will be carried will be orientation, but called training.

At the other end of the training in place at present is the NZQA courses which spend months training people but since the people doing the training are not using practical training as part of the process people are qualifying but actually know nothing about the industry or how to apply it.

As I have said to people doing the courses. I won't employ you unless I know you & you are up to a minimum standard, where as I will employ ex military people on the spot if a position is available, even though their training is not recognized in the industry. Despite being the highest level of security.

The proposed training suggested in the new bill is 12 to 18 hours. Again it will be the first two shifts of orientation will be counted as training. No training in relevant law to that position as in say a hospital.

For the base training it should be a three week basic course of mainly hands on (or in military terms BHL -battle handling lessons followed by BHE's -battle handling exercises) training. Then they can have follow up training courses tailored to their specific requirements.

There used to be a course here in Christchurch run mainly on these lines but which had to fufil the funding requirements of four months for initial course & certain other requriements that had nothing to do with the industry. People that attended these courses initially had a hard time finding work as the standards were too high for the industry. What work they did get showed them to be better trained than those without any training or coming from other courses without the practical element.

Now it is even worse where you can do the course by correspondence.

Not to mention the training establishments that sign up people who cannot work in the industry generally due to criminal background. So they give them false hope, sign them up to a student loan & then at the end of it they get nothing. All it has done is give the provider extra funding.

During submissions on the new bill regarding security personnel, I was astounded to hear a training provider classify NZ training as world class. The British consultant who has made a documentary is more on the button with his description as worse than West Africa. That is where you hand a 10 year old a weapon & tell him he is security or a soldier.

What needs to be put in place as stated is a three week hands on course which is then followed up by add on courses. I.E. a two to four day recognized holds course.

One this produces more income for the government so keeps them happy & two the financial drain is not so great on those attending the course.

It also means that carried out professionally the government is not handing out funding for people to do courses in an industry they can't work in.

All in all there needs to be a huge change in culture in NZ in regards to security & within the industry.

Apathy Again.

Kia Ora,

Well it seems everyday here in NZ you see another example of apathy towards personal security or security in general. On Trade Me (NZ's local version of E Bay) a student has being selling substances that can be used to make explosives. His claim is that they are being used to fertilize farms. The only thing is the amounts are so small no farmer would buy them.

It is not uncommon here for young people to make or try to make their own fireworks or explosives using what they have learnt on the internet.

It is also not uncommon for that to then end in a police call out where often the police are unaware of what they are dealing with.

Two incidents come to mind. Several years ago whilst walking back from the gym find a police road block on street to rear of mine & knowing the police sergeant in charge ask him what is going on. He describes the substance found in bottles on a property with wires sticking out & then says "but that could never be an explosive" until I point out it is what was main ingredient of the Oklahoma bomb. Then they got serious.

The Next incident was only a few years ago when a large group of young people could be heard in a park nearby & suddenly there were airbursts from a home made mortar. You can get the designs off the internet.

Police were called but the officers that responded had to come to me for advice as they had no experience with explosives so weren't sure what could happen.

But still with these advertised items for sale the apathy continues. As they are available from one source it should of alerted alarms bells a lot sooner. But then so should of the theft of a large amount of fertilizer then followed by the theft of Liquid LPG tanks as together they could make a guy fawkes you will never forget.

Here it is "oh that will likely be for someones cannabis plot". It maybe but you should be looking at worst case scenario & working your way back.

Proactive Policing & security.

Kia Ora,

Interesting comment after yesterdays post. Agree with most of it but there needs to be some comment on points raised.

Crimestoppers has arrived here in NZ & has shown it is effective in Britain. It is definitely a part of what needs to be a three part targetting of crime though how effective it will be will depend if NZ gets over its 'don't get involved or don't dob' mentality.

The other two parts are one that is mentioned proactive policing. But there isn't any. I know this is upsetting many in the police as they now are controlled by KPI's (Key Point Indicators) which don't work in business os how they are supposed to work in policing I am not sure. NZ polcing is now mainly reactive & any reports of suspicious activity are not acted on. Crime isn't even acted on because they are too busy elsewhere. Call in a suspect drunk driver though & you will get alsorts descending on you. That is a fact because in last few months working security have called police for suspicious activity, including possible major crime about to go down, crime in progress & possible drunk driver. The only one that brought a response was the drunk driver.

Added to that you can use good proactive security. It just hardly ever happens in NZ. If you do it, you risk getting told to stop or questioned as too why you were taking any notice.

In fact you risk being told the same by police & even told you are wasting police time. I know a lot of police don't agree with it, but that is the system they now live in with too few police on the ground both for effective policing & on the grounds of health & safety.

To now have a white supremist group claiming they are patrolling some streets of Christchurch because there is no effective security in those areas are worrying. The police claim otherwise. I well remember the US military claiming the same whilst insurgents/Al Qaeda patrolled & controlled suburbs of Baghdad.

Police chases again

Police again in the news for a death from a chase.

Now we will hear from those saying police chase too much. I disagree. Again NZ mindset has to change, just like it does in regards to security. By it being well known that the police have to pull out if it becomes too dangerous it has actually created a more dangerous situation as people just take off & drive recklessly thinking well the police will stop soon. Most of these people are not as good drivers as they think & end up coming worse off.

Or you have the other side of it. Another chase & a crash & what do the police find, pistol, ammunition & drugs. Doesn't take an Einstein to guess what that person might of being up too. Too bad he couldn't ride a bike as after a high speed chase he hits a slow moving police car when trying to pass.

An Australian made an interesting comment to me the other day. He had seen a business opportunity here in NZ, but on arrival & after set up has said the biggest issue here is apathy & that is what we see in security. It is what we are seeing here again with police chases. The person at fault is the person who runs from the police, not the police. Automatically police go into mode of defending their actions. Yes it is good to review to see if it could be done better, but the responsibility lies with the person who ran. End of story. But the public think of it is the police being reckless again.

With security it is "oh we don't need that here". I repeat "The biggest threat is the belief there is no threat". The fact that that sentiment now features on international TV makes NZ more of a terrorist target.

That sentiment & apathy is also why there is reputedly a blog or website by a European saying NZ is worst country in the world to visit. When something does happen here it comes as a shock to the tourist.

Same thing with tourists driving. Ok there is the issue that we drive on the opposite side of the road to most of the world & that causes issue but our overall driving is so bad that NZ needs to really look at itself.

I mentioned sometime back about seeing a new security company in town & was impressed. The reason was the guard was actually looking for issues. He mentioned after first getting back into the industry he worked at a position where for his 'training' he was constantly told to ignore issue or don't look for them. That again points to the apathy as a big part of actually providing security is to find the issues & stop them before they become major.

I distinctly remember US soldiers ignoring our observations of first a car load of people watching them at the check point & then the next day of a guy in a taxi with a videio camera. The following two days that check point was hit by suicide bombers. It could of being prevented had there not being the apathy by the soldiers on the check point.

Where will it end?

Kia Ora,

Reports yesterday of two persons committing a burglary here in Christchurch or on the outskirts who then attacked the two victims including an elderly lady.

As the economy is set to get worse despite the claims of a recovery, there will be only more & more violent crime. It won't affect those already at the bottom as they already struggle. What you are going to see more off is those considered middle class as the lack of financial IQ is going to harm them.

How does this affect security?

First there is my favourite subject the requirement for a culture of risk assessment.

It just doesn't happen here in NZ. For example I have a set of circumstances I relate into how I carryout my risk assessment which virtually always makes Kiwis think when I put it to them. Unfortunately I didn't use them when giving my submission to parliament over the new security personnel bill.

First scenario is dealing with kindergarten aged kids. I was in a situation doing a show for kids this age when I was asked if I was wearing my body armour. My reply was & is "Yes because first under health & safety if I own or are issued protective equipment I have to justify not wearing it. Second, most murders in NZ are domestic related & where children are involved emotions are that much higher". The answer I get is invaribly "Oh I didn't think of it like that".

Second scenario is the time I arrived to find the group they needed a 'guard' for actually needed at least 10 bodyguards at appropriate remuneration due to threat. & there was a threat, but information passed on was nil so no threat/risk assessment could be carried out.

Third scenario I use is  major sports events until  & including 2011.

Then there is the Soccer world cup in South Africa. Again there are concerns because of the attacks on the Togo soccer team in Angola. South Africa is a different kettle of fish & are used to good security oir have the ability to put it in place.

Then we get to NZ & the Rugby World Cup 2011. Because there is a believe that it will never happen here not much will change despite assurance all will be well. Any terrorist will be guided to the biggest group of people around. It is all about the experience here, not the security. This is all despite the fact terrorist act do & have occurred here in the past.

The biggest threat is the believe there is no threat. I am aware of at least one person in the country I would consider a likely suicide bomber. He is the last person many would think of.

Armed Police

Kia Ora,

This morning there is a poll out saying most New Zealanders want our police to remain unarmed apart from AOS (Armed Offenders Squad - Like SWAT).

This shows the lack of understanding of what police & security face each day on the streets. Not to mention the people who are against having the tasers issued to police. A taser is a lot less lethal than a firearm.

So if we have only the AOS armed regularly then they have to stop being general duty (normal policing who respond to AOS callouts when required) & basically have a fully armed squad ready at all times. At present it takes too long for them to assemble, arm up, get briefing then deploy. In the meantime unarmed police, security & members of the public have to deal with the offenders. As Christchurch police recently said virtually every person they arrest these days has at least a knife on them.

This then calls into question as to whether security should be armed. Security in NZ was armed until 1974, but weapons were always out of sight or kept low key. No need to change that policy.

True I wouldn't arm (& to many of those in the industry's credit they don't want to be armed) 99% of those currently in the industry with a ball point pen, but a small percentage who have either had the training (I.E. military) or are prepared to be trained do need to be armed.

Weapons? Well consideration needs to be given here. Despite what you see in the movies pistols are never that accurate without a hell of a lot of training & I see the NZ police are going to push the glock pistol aside to make M4 the main weapon carried. More accurate with less training, so less chance of 'collatoral' damage, though even there I would question choice of weapon in many cases.

Then you have to consider the tourist. On more than one occassion I have being told whilst overseas they thought NZ looked great, heard nice things about it, but it was too dangerous as police (& security) were not armed. Tourism is one of our biggest earners of currency & we could ensure by carriage of weapons in a discreet fashion that more feel welcome.

India

Kia Ora,

Well the news this morning is all terror threats again after the attacks on the Togo soccer team & how that will affect sports events in India.

India or Pakistan it is part of life & like Britain it happens & they get on with life, so attacks there will happen but in the scheme of things won't really make much impact like the 9/11 attacks did.

People are only looking short term, but really they need a longer term view. What is the connection between 9/11 & Bali. Both seen as places that there would not likely to be attacks so the impact would be greater.

Now what people often regard as a safe place, & we even have had politicians & sports people state it on international TV, is New Zealand. As they used to say in World War Two & it still applies today, "The biggest threat is the belief there is no threat".

What needs to happen is clean up the security industry here in NZ, put the processes in place so that when major events arrive here there is not the step up of great proportions that is required here at present.

One of the major issues here in NZ that when you do have good security it becomes a victim of its own success. There are problems so guards are put in place, they deal with issue or it moves on & then the number of guards are cut drastically or altogether or they get a cheaper company that doesn't actually do security & go that extra mile. Then the issue comes back.

As a building block to a higher standard of security our society needs to realize that instead of getting rid of the good security, they require the rest to lift their standards. Society must also expect to pay that little extra for that peace of mind. They buy insurance, & what is security but a form of insurance or lessening claims.

Passion

Kia Ora,

People say to me why do you get so upset about the security industry here in NZ. Just forget it. We know that there is going to be a terrorist attack some time, so just leave it & wait until then because the NZ industry & authorities have no idea. Then you will be able to step in & pick up the pieces.

The reason why I get so upset is my passion is in security & it is what I am extremely good at. It now ties in with my other passion of investing & financial education. Hence this blog so I can put my frustration to a wider community.

Now I see in the news that NZ is going to help  the US with research & implimenting security to counter terrorism. As these are the two countries that I would say have the least knowledge in this area, I don't see it stopping much.

The first thing that you need to help counter terrorism is understand the culture (hearts & minds - ironically the NZ army leads the world in this),something the US in particular does not do period. NZ at times shows this as well when dealing with culturally different groups. We are only focussed on British heritage & wrongs to Maori (as someone of Maori descent this needs to be sorted, as someone in the security/military community it needs to be sorted as histroy shows that the longer you leave it the more violent it is likely to be), but we do not take into account many older cultures or cultural norms.

I.E. Was once called to a guard job to find they were a group that would normally be protected by 20 -30 armed bodyguards & we should of being at least 10 bodyguards of at least my experience level on site. In stead there was just me paid as a security guard. Very insulting to this group.

The next point from this collusion on counter terrorism is  talk of new technology. At the end of the day all the technology in the world is only an aid to the person on the ground. At the higher threat levels it is all about numbers of people & the training to pick up anything out of the ordinary. Anything a person can create, another person can defeat.

Crime to rise

Kia Ora,

Well if the economic situation wasn't bad enough & causing a rise in crime we now have this group of people organizing clubs to smoke the worst of the drugs in Marijuana. One of the reasons it is the worst of drugs is it stays in your body fat until a stressful situation causes it to release. For each person what is stressful is different.

To be able to pay for these drugs there will be an increase in crime & as more job losses occur then there will be a corresponding rise in crime.

There is a claim by this group that Marijuana is less of issue than cigarette smoking & alcohol. Obviously smoking the weed has affected their brain cells. It has now being shown that smoking marijuana is worse on your health as a cause of cancer than normal cigarettes.

Though Alcohol tends to bring out violence, Marijuana actually causes greater violence in some people & also when consumed alongside alcohol it can do the same. Whats more is alcohol like most of the drugs is water soluble so out of the system in 24 hours where as marijuana is fat soluble & just one joint can stay in your system for up to 6 months. There have being instances where former heavy uses have had a reaction 18 months after their last use.

Much of todays crime is not even about doing it to gain monetary reward, it tends to be just to damage property for the sake of it. With an increase in drugs this will only cause a rise in this type of crime.

light at the end of the tunnel

Kia Ora,

There is a new security company in town & was well impressed because they were doing security.

So maybe there is light at the end of the tunnel. With new service I am looking to launch here in Christchurch, those few companies that pride themselves on trying to provide actual security & the many who want to or want to learn more about the industry it could be time of change.

To get real change though is unfortunately going to have to require legislation from the NZ Government that is robust & actually has imput from those that know security. Not the extra piece of toilet paper that the current bill is. Poorly written, lack of knowledge & poor advice means instead of moving forward 35 years into the future with out new legislation we will be going backwards 40 years.

NZ already has the most out of date security legislation in the Western world & it is 35 years old. Only thing that they haven't done by turning the clock back is re arm the security. NZ security was armed until 1974 & at least a small proportion of it should be now with threat levels.

Again it comes down to lack of a culture of risk assessment. All the talk is of risk management but you can't really risk manae if you don't know how to risk assess. The health & safety legislation doesn't help here because it basically says that if you don't identify the threat then you are OK. But that is a catch 22 because if something happens & you should of identified it then you are for the high jump.

Coming from a military background it is the other way around. You identify the worst scenario you can & come up with actions to counter. This way when something does happen people are mentally prepared even if action is not the right one in hindsight it is more likely to save lives or injuries by being prepared.

Threats

Kia Ora,

It seems NZ is too receive visits shortly from two high profile visitors at the same time. Security will be stretched & what is the threat? Are there likely to be terorist attacks?

The visists will definitely be tempting targets & because of the low standards of security there is a possability of attacks during these visits, especially when you add in the stolen fertilizer (several tonnes) & now the stolen LPG (liquid gas) tanks. put them together & mix in another ingredient & you have one very big bomb. So they don't have to even get too close to make a statement.

But if you think like a terrorist then they may like to wait until the Rugby World Cup when security will be even more stretched & of a lower standard.

In the meantime shootings have increased in US as more people are laid off & the stress of it gets to people. A slight change in one area of NZ economy shortly & there will be businesses closing like people wouldn't believe. Crime will increase yet again & become more violent.

Already over last week or so there have being home invasions with bashings of women, firearms presented at taxi dirvers & attempted armed robberies & they are the ones that have being reported. So that is only the tip of the ice berg of actual crime.

P Threat

Kia Ora,

I see that the police are clamping down on 'P' & whilst it is definitely involved in a lot of crime or the reason for crime it is still not the worst of the drugs. That title goes to the 'harmless' Marijuana.

Many will disagree with that & for many it is harmless. Having worked security at a major hospital dealing a lot with psychiatric patients it soon became evident that the green tobacco was behind many of the illnesses. Not only that addicts told us that many of the minor crime waves they had being involved in were due to their dealers giviing them the drug free in return to items gained from crimes. One claimed to have once broken into 45 cars down a street & was never caught.

Others will say alcohol is the worst. Yes it is involved in a lot of crime in particular violent crime here in NZ, but because of the perceived harmless nature of marijuana, the crimes it is responsible for tend to be in the background. It is also the first step into the world of harder drugs for many.

Bomb Threats

Kia ora,

Well yesterday bomb threats were the name of the day with one in Auckland & one in Christchurch.

The one in Auckland ended up with one embarrassed tennis fan who had left their bag sitting at seat for a period. But this follows NZ mindset. People just don't think about it. The world has changed & people need to be aware of where they place & leave their gear. Even just for basic security of your personal belongings at any sports event or event fullstop you need to either have them with you or having someone look after them.

Unlike a fire drill, a bomb threat drill requires people to take all their belongings with them.

With both threats the distance the cordon goes out depends on a lot of variables, but one thing that has to be considered in a built up area is the area likely to be affected by an explosion can be quite different than those in set explosive safety requirements.

For example when applying their set standards used in Northern Ireland the British soon realized that those requirements in Hong Kong could require the movement of up to 48,000 people.

What has all this to do with basic security. It should be a drill all security personel know, but in NZ very few do. To ensure that resources are not tied up by continous bomb threats the security person on the ground needs to know how to investigate any claims in the first instance before taking it higher.

That is actually how the military deal with it. The majority of suspicious objects or bomb threats are first checked by troops on the ground. This ensures resources are used when threat is more likely to be true.

Holes in Security

Kia ora,

Recent news is the missing explosives in Yemen. Only a few truck loads so don't mind. But do you need explosives. Couple months back here in NZ a few tonnes of fertilizer went missing. Now that was what the Oklahoma bomb was. Fertilizer makes the main ingredient in that type of bomb. But no one in NZ would consider it might be used for terrorist purposes.

Other recent news is the male not going through correct lane in US airport. This will almost certainly have happened due to division of roles. Where as in Britain they tend to work together due to years of dealing with IRA, US & NZ tend to be delegated roles & are not to interfere or assist others. As I said in an earlier blog this was what I came across on one task where staff were to be sacked if they looked at areas outside their designated ones.

It also mirrors what we seen in Baghdad at one high risk area. It was all searches etc in one direction but hardly ever looked at in other direction. & out that other gate we know the insurgency took 200 stolen AK's, uniforms & kidknapped 9 locals from inside the 'secure' area. Over time they also from a number of areas stole on seperate occassions, a minimi, 12 humvees, 11 humvees & 2 Bradleys.

Again this can come back to getting right at the basic level. But to do that systems have to be in place. That is robust systems, not something dreamed up in an office. Something that works on the ground.

Basics

Kia Ora,

All this talk of terrorism. But what has it to do with basic security in NZ?

Because at all levels security is essentially the same. Good basic security makes an area safer on all levels.

The SAS will tell you that if they have to carryout mayhem & destruction, if given an option they will avoid good line (those who are the frontline) infantry (such as my old units) who do the basics well.

Same with security. Criminals will look for the weak points, just like soldiers & terrorists do.

Often overseas in particular in Britain terrorist attacks have being foiled by just good security awareness. When the vehicle tried to drive into a Scottish airport & two car bombs failed to detonate at the same time in London, the car bombs were foiled by exactly that. One was seen by Ambulance staff who thought it out of place & the other was cleared by tow truck administering parking time rules.

Now in NZ a car will sit there for weeks or even months whilst we go through our procedures. Criminals take advantage of this & terrorists would too. I have even seen a car in the classic car bomb attitude, but no one had questioned it for two to three weeks it had being there (in the vicinity of a major transport hub) as they had all being told to ignore anything not on their patch or they would get fired. Extremely poor security awareness due to this & that there were five/six government departments & private security companies working that area. Good basic security should of picked it up. As I did when doing my first patrol of area.

It happens all the time. Someone doing the basics picks up something wrong that has being like that for a long time but no one had noticed it. From there it is either a big panic or more likely new person is told to ignore it & soon leaves as they can't hold to the low standards.

One supervisor used to even threaten people who found insecurities after his patrol, & so nothing was ever reported. Everyone makes mistakes & this site had people working 24/7 so they did open things like doors after patrol went through. Only way to identify problems is to report honestly. Staff use to complain that security was no good as undesriables were getting in. Staff were at fault for leaving doors open but no one was aware of issue because of this non reporting.

So basic's is all that is needed to begin with & it can be effective against all threat levels.

World Cup Rugby 2011

Kia Ora,

Over the last few days there have being reports that England are looking at not sending a team to the Commonwealth Games due to security threat.

Just wait until the look at NZ security set up in depth for the Rugby World Cup. There will need to be a 1000% improvement or Australia will just take the World Cup again. The main area though is not just the training. that can be done in three weeks, it is the change in mindset.

That doesn't mean security stop greeting in a friendly manner first up. It does mean they start using a wider view of how they look at & carry out the security tasks assigned to them.

To say that there is no threat such as terrorism in NZ is a myth.

First we have had terrorist attacks here before, but everyone forgets. Secondly daily we have terrorism in the form of organized crime. By the definition used in the US organized crime is the greatest terrorist threat there both prior to & since 9/11. At present time in NZ organized crime is the greatest terrorist threat. Organized crime are likely to assist any extremist group.

The terror raids in Tuhoe caught people that belong to some of the greatest terrorist groups in the world at present. Animal rights & Eco greens are higher rated in the UK than the IRA & were prior to 9/11.

People forget the world war two maxium. "The biggest threat is the belief there is no threat".

Just a few things to think on.

Booze bans

Kia Ora,

Well I see people are complaining that police have being over the top in enforcing booze bans. What those complaining forget is if the NZ drinking culture meant people could handle their alcohol then the police could focus elsewhere. When you have to deal with the drunken idiots & the mindless violence. If people grew up about how to drink then there wouldn't be the problem.

The same applies to people who complain about police chases. Yes the police have to review each chase to see what they could do better, but to complain everytime there is a crash when police are giving chase shows people are not thinking. The only people at fault in all these situations are those running from the police. Why are they running?

My solution. If you run from police then automatic three years hard labour. Then the only people running would be those that are wanted for more extreme crime. Run the labour like military prison is. Won't be many wanting to do it twice.