ABSTRACT
Introduction ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 88 Significance of Communication ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 89 Communicating with Diverse Communities in Australia ����������������������������������������������� 90 A Case Study on Communication Preference ������������������������������������������������������������������ 93 Research Study ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 94 Findings and Discussion ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 95 Conclusion ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 99 Limitations of Study ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 99 References ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 99
Abstract Since the end of the Second World War, economic migration and humanitarian resettlement in many developed countries has led to mass movements of people� Such human movements to date on a global scale have brought social, economic, and political changes to destination countries� One of the significant changes the countries have experienced is increased linguistic diversity and cultural make-up, which manifests in terms of various dynamics among citizens interacting with essential public services in their daily lives� Linguistic diversity can add to the richness of society, but it can also create challenges� One of these challenges is the effective communication in the course of public service provision including policing and crime fighting, and, increasingly, counter-terrorism and counter-extremism efforts� Government agencies including law enforcement agencies adopt a range of communication methods� However, such methods largely appear to be top-down approaches� Certain perceived or real issues such as the feeling of being harassed or targeted by law enforcement expressed by members of some ethnic communities appear to remain the same despite decades of communication efforts� This study aims to gain insight into the preferences of ethnic communities about communication with public services in Australia, with an objective to add to the current knowledge by way of acquiring bottom-up feedback from members of a wide range of ethnic communities� A survey designed for this purpose was completed by 258
members of diverse ethnic communities with 21 language backgrounds in Melbourne, Australia� The findings are presented and their potential implications are discussed for policymakers and frontline staff� A number of research areas are identified for follow-up studies�
In the aftermath of the Second World War, Western developed nations witnessed a rapid change in the make-up of their communities� This was a result of economic migration and refugee and humanitarian resettlement programmes arising from wars and conflicts in Vietnam, the Middle East, parts of Africa, Asia, and South America (Fierravanti-Wells, 2015; Messina, 2007; Tanton, McCormack, & Smith, 1996)� More recent events following the Arab Spring uprisings and the Syrian civil war and the emergence of extremist groups such as the Islamic State (IS) in Syria and Iraq also see the displacement of millions of people, some of whom sought refuge in safer neighbouring countries, and others in Western European countries� These mass movements of people have resulted in major social, economic, and political changes in the destination countries, many of which have traditionally been mono-lingual societies and used to a static cultural and population make-up (e�g� Australia, Germany, Sweden, and Norway)� One of the significant changes in the destination countries is an increased diversity of languages spoken in the community, which has, in turn, created different human dynamics in society and impacted on the level of integration by the new ethnic community members� Increased diversity of languages can add to the richness of a community, but it can also create challenges� One challenge is communication between newly arrived community members with various linguistic and cultural backgrounds and various public services and government agencies, including police forces and other law enforcement agencies� Members of these agencies suddenly find themselves having to deal with language barriers in questioning suspects, interviewing victims of crime, or taking statements from witnesses� The changing demography, cultural, and linguistic make-up of our society due to people movement, leads to ‘the rapidly changing social environment of policing’ (Chan, 1997, p� 94)� Language barriers have had an impact on proactive initiatives implemented by law enforcement in areas such as crime prevention, fighting radicalisation, and building community resilience� Imam Syed Soharwardy, founder of the Islamic Supreme Council of Canada, cited language barriers as one of the reasons that parents do not turn to authorities if they suspect their child is being radicalised (Ho, 2015)� Pickering, Wright-Neville, McCulloch, and Lentini’s (2007) three-year study done in Victoria, Australia, on counter-terrorism policing identifies language barriers of culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) communities to be the most important issue identified by police� A similar study in the United States (Shah, Rahman, & Khashu, 2007) also finds that language often poses a barrier to effective policing� At the same time, Schneider (2007) reports on the Canadian experience on community crime prevention by asserting that
the most obvious is the language barrier: poor English language skills of many residents and the lack of proficiency in predominant languages other than English among local crime prevention group leaders, CPO [Crime Prevention Office] staff and volunteers, and the police� (p� 101)
Myhill (2006) highlights the significance of community engagement for effective policing and crime prevention� He suggests that participation and engagement in various policing processes and initiatives essentially rely on communication� Communicating between the police and citizens in mono-lingual and mono-cultural societies is by no means trouble-free or straightforward, not to mention the added challenges faced by destination countries where a wide range of languages are spoken by immigrants and humanitarian settlers� In Australia, the Federal Department of Human Services 2012-2013 annual report reveals the department used interpreters and translators of 230 languages in the provision of their services (Department of Human Services, 2013, p� 138)� This indicates the sheer size of the diversity of languages and cultures within Australia, which many Western countries with large immigrant and humanitarian intake programmes are likely to be similar to� Such linguistic and cultural heterogeneity has significant implications for government on how best to achieve effective communication with citizens� This chapter examines how policing and law enforcement agencies can communicate effectively with non-English-speaking community members in order to maintain law and order as well as protect citizens’ safety and security� It explores current methods adopted in communicating with ethnic community members by policing and law enforcement agencies� Furthermore, it reports on a survey conducted in Melbourne, Australia, on community attitudes about their preferred way of communication� The aim of comparing empirical evidence with existing policy is to encourage policymakers to identify more appropriate methods and means of communication with its citizens of multicultural and multilingual backgrounds�
A nation’s proactive crime prevention strategies and fostering of community resilience relies on sound community engagement (Myhill, 2006)� At the heart of community engagement is effective communication between citizens and law enforcement at all levels from local, force, regional, and national� Similarly, Lane and Henry (2004) contend that communication through community development can build community resilience and assist in crime prevention through building an ‘inclusive, yet open and diverse community’ (p� 206)� Under recent international political contexts, the Islamic State is seen exerting tremendous influence to radicalise people from other countries� It then attracts them to join it as foreign fighters, and increases violent extremist threats on home soil� Lone wolves seem to lead ordinary lives in domestic contexts� Increased tensions can be observed between ethnic communities and local authorities (Bowling & Philips, 2003)� Among a complicated web of factors leading to home-grown radical elements and factors like
marginalisation emerge as key reasons behind some local terrorist activities (NATO-OTAN, 2014; Silber & Bhatt, 2007; Zammit, n�d�)� Countering marginalisation is proposed in solutions on how to counter extremism and radicalisation, especially in recent attacks and sieges on civilians on home soil perpetrated by people within the community including: the Boston bombing in April 2013, the Sydney Lindt Café siege 10 days before Christmas 2014, and the Charlie Hebdo attack in Paris in January 2015� Attention on extremism and radicalisation among home-grown communities in the West has led to numerous debates by experts, politicians, columnists, and the general public about what causes these problems and how they can be addressed� Overwhelmingly, the root causes of some of the examples cited are misguided youth, misunderstanding of religious doctrines, the lack of dialogue and information between mainstream and marginalised communities, and vulnerable community members getting the wrong message, or being brainwashed� This is then followed by debates and discussion on possible solutions to these root causes, other than the use of direct force� The solutions highlight an urgent need to get the message across, reach out to communities to embrace them, foster understanding and forge constructive dialogue (Carleton, 2014; Commonwealth of Australia, 2015; Tahiri & Grossman, 2014)� They all essentially point to a recognition that there are problems with communication and there is a need for more effective communication� Governments and their agencies are in possession of a wide range of communication means and resources� Ironically as things are, extremist groups appear to use similar tools and resources, although on a lesser scale, much more effectively and more nimbly, especially in terms of online media and political and social networks (Roy, 2007)� Others recognise that the narratives effectively put forward by violent extremists must be understood so that counter-narratives to combat extremism and promote integration can be developed (Carleton, 2014; Commonwealth of Australia, 2015; Sutherland, 2007)� Governments must keep pace with the needs and preferences of society when it comes to issues pertaining to homeland security� In this light, Grabosky (2009) suggests that ‘law enforcement agencies should be able to anticipate what the community’s security preferences are’ (p� 95)� Governments are unable to understand community preference if they do not have bottom-up feedback from the grassroots� In the current international security climate, to manage security needs and expectations is by no means easy, even in a mono-lingual or mono-cultural national context, not to mention the added complexities brought about by linguistic and cultural heterogeneity in countries which receive immigrants of diverse backgrounds� Such diversity is recognised as a challenge for policing in multicultural communities (Ben-Porat, 2008; Larsen, 2010; Victoria Police, 2013; Voyez, 2007)� However, if properly nurtured and utilised, diversity can also become the strength of a society that is testament to the common bond of humanity�
Australia has a highly diverse population make-up� The 2011 Census data of Australia shows 1 in 4 people in the population were born overseas and about 1 in 5 speak a language other than English (LOTE) at home� A comparison of LOTE speakers at home over 2001, 2006, and 2011 census data shows an upward trend – 15�2%, 15�8%, and
18�2%, respectively� Settlement data across 5 years from 2008 to 2012 in terms of English proficiency (answers available in the census question: not recorded, nil, poor, good, very good) and migration stream (categories available: family, humanitarian, skilled, other) show that an average of 28% of settlers who arrived under the family stream scheme indicated their English proficiency level as either ‘nil’ or ‘poor’� Those arriving under the humanitarian stream and said their English was either ‘nil’ or ‘poor’ was close to 75%� In addition, about 7% of some 659,245 skilled migration settlers who arrived in Australia between 2008 and 2012 under the skilled migration stream, by far the largest group among the migration streams, reported that their English proficiency level was either ‘nil’ or ‘poor’� In summary, Australia’s 186,444 new settlers (17%) across all migration streams out of a total of 1,078,920 settlers between 2008 and 2012 reported their English proficiency as ‘nil’ or ‘poor’� As this data is self-reported, it is reasonable to assume that some of those who ticked ‘good’ to indicate their English proficiency and some of those who are in the ‘not recorded’ category (a fairly significant proportion of the skilled stream) may have English deficiencies with respect to formal written or spoken discourse� They are therefore likely to encounter difficulty in the course of various activities in their everyday interaction with public services� Language is not a barrier for newly arrived migrants and refugees only� Australia also has more than 200 Indigenous languages (AIATSIS & FATSIL, 2005) spoken by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians� In 2011, there were 548,370 people identified as being of Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander origin who were counted in the Census, and 61,800 (11�3%) stated they spoke Australian indigenous languages at home (ABS, 2011)� In addition to these statistics on spoken languages, there is also another group – deaf or hearing impaired people – who may have language barriers when interacting with public services, preventing them from fully participating in society� The number of deaf or hearing impaired people who use Auslan or sign language, vary depending on the source� The 2011 Census has 8,406 people nationwide nominating Auslan as the language they spoke at home� This figure was 5,537 in 2006, an increase of 2,869, or 51�8%� Some estimate, on the other hand, that as much as about 1% of the Australian population may need to use sign language, employing either natural sign or Auslan� These statistics reflect a high linguistic heterogeneity, including spoken or sign languages, due to migrant, indigenous, and deaf or hearing impaired populations in contemporary Australia� What these figures tell us is that a significant section of the community will continue to have language barriers for decades to come� Therefore, from a police and broader law enforcement perspective, communication with these sections of the community will remain a challenge that merits more research for insights into what has worked and not worked in the past and new methodologies appropriate for the present and into the future� The sorts of contacts between police and community members with low English proficiency is probably not significantly different from what the police have to deal with in other sections of the community that have no language barrier, although some areas are more common in some language groups than others� For example, the number of women prisoners with Vietnamese background in Victorian prisons is significantly higher than some other ethnic groups that have a larger population in Victoria (Le & Gilding, 2014)� According to Chan (1997, p� 99), the most frequent contacts with non-English-speaking background citizens by police relate to:
• domestic violence • property offence • drug offences • traffic violations • other serious offences against the person.
