Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Further Organised Crimes Reforms) Bill 2026

Hansard ID: HANSARD-1323879322-168814

Hansard session: Fifty-Eighth Parliament, First Session (58-1)

Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Further Organised Crimes Reforms) Bill 2026

Second Reading Debate

Debate resumed from an earlier hour.

Mr GREG WARREN (Campbelltown) (12:23:57):

I am delighted to make a short contribution to debate on an importance piece of legislation, the Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Further Organised Crimes Reforms) Bill 2026, for the reasons that the Premier outlined during question time. I first make a couple of important observations. The police have not been in the current tragic situation for quite some time, and there is no greater tragedy than for the innocent victims. Gangs, thugs and criminals are recruiting children to do their dirty work. Some members in this place have exercised an element of posturing to try to push a political agenda, rather than pragmatically providing our police with the support that they desperately need.

All members, including the Premier and the police Minister, want to pass the bill as quickly as we can. However, it had to be done right to ensure that the relevant and appropriate powers were effectively placed in the legislation. It will be most effective if it provides the authorities, the commission and the police the ability to get on with the job of keeping the community safe. Our community had its heart broken by the tragedy in Glen Alpine. My heart goes out to the family in my electorate who suffered that tragedy, as well as to the many other families who have been affected by those heinous crimes. The Government is taking every appropriate action, either through legislation or other mechanisms, to support our local police.

My final observation is about our police officers and authorities, who are working diligently and bravely in uncharted waters to remedy the situation of gangland crime. We have seen gangland crime in the past. I vividly remember the Milperra Father's Day massacre that occurred during the bikie wars. I also recall other times in history, particularly the gangland wars during the Carr Government's time and the Middle Eastern crime unit that was established. Those were unique circumstances at that time, and I remember that the Parliament came together sensibly. It united to pass legislation so that our police were well supported. To conclude, I respectfully say to those who would use this situation for political purposes, rather than pragmatic purposes, that there will be plenty of other opportunities to do that. However, my friends, this is not that time and this is not that issue. We need to arm our police as best we can and protect our children.

Mr GREG PIPER (Lake Macquarie) (12:28:30):

I contribute to debate on the Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Further Organised Crimes Reforms) Bill 2026, specifically regarding the proposed expansion of the digital evidence access order [DEAO] scheme. Schedule 2 would amend the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 to create a new type of digital evidence access order that would be available in connection with organised crime investigations. The new type of DEAO would be available in an investigation of an organised crime offence, being a "serious offence" that is linked to organised crime. The bill provides a list of those serious offences, which include, among others, offences prescribed by the regulations. In her second reading speech, the Minister for Police and Counter‑terrorism said:

Limiting the scope of the DEAO (organised crime) to the organised crime context will ensure that the proposed power does not expand the use of these orders to lower level offending that is not linked or associated with organised crime, as this is not the focus of these reforms.

The Minister also provided that the reform was prompted by the statutory review of the 2022 reforms. Further, she said that the bill will:

… enable police to apply for a DEAO in relation to devices that are lawfully seized in the context of organised crime investigations where a search warrant or crime scene warrant had not been sought. This supports timely police access to critical digital evidence in fast-moving organised crime investigations where delays can risk loss, encryption or remote wiping of data.

Noting the intrusive nature of DEAOs generally, the serious penalties for noncompliance with an organised crime DEAO and the process for obtaining one—including that it is not required to be in connection with a warrant and is applied for after the device is lawfully seized—it is vital that the focus of the reform is kept front of mind. It must be periodically assessed to ensure that the policy intent of the provisions remains valid and that their terms are appropriate for achieving the objectives.

I foreshadow that I will move an amendment to require regular statutory review of the bill's proposed DEAO provisions, along with the existing DEAO scheme, which is not currently subject to ongoing review. The amendment aims to ensure that the department and the Parliament, in which those reviews are tabled, remain critical and vigilant about the operation and impact of DEAOs. I also note that the statutory review of the 2022 reforms made other recommendations for further consideration regarding the DEAO scheme that I believe are vital to informing its operation, its effectiveness and its impact on individuals' rights and liberties.

That includes, without limitation, the following recommendations. First, the NSW Police Force should consider options to more effectively capture information that can illustrate the use of DEAOs. That includes information about the type of offences they are used in connection with, which can enable future consideration of their value for law enforcement across different types of offences. Second, law enforcement agencies should take action on the issues raised by the Information and Privacy Commission concerning the maintenance of accurate records and compliance with privacy legislation in implementing DEAOs.

Information about the use of DEAOs, as well as privacy and record-keeping considerations, inform the subject matter of the proposed statutory review. I call on the Government to explain the action it is taking to address those recommendations. With the rise in and evolution of organised crime, I understand the Police Force needs new and different tools to respond to increasing violence. However, we must be critical and must continually review any intrusive powers given to ensure they do not unduly trespass on personal rights and liberties and are, in fact, necessary to fight crime and keep people safe.

Finally, it would be remiss of me not to comment on the Government's proposed amendments to the bill, which would, among other things, expand serious indictable offences for children. That would mean children charged with offences must be committed to the District Court or Supreme Court and could be sentenced as adults. Those amendments respond to the organised crime shootings we have seen in Sydney. I believe that any Government faced with the recent surge in violence would take steps to protect public safety. However, despite the seriousness of the proposed provisions, they will not lay on the table for five full calendar days before they are debated, in accordance with regular procedure. That is because they will be introduced as amendments to existing legislation rather than as a separate bill. I take this opportunity to urge against rushing through legislation that deprives members and the broader community of the opportunity to grapple with the implications and nature of reform, particularly in the case of legislation such as this bill, which is quite complicated. It deserves to be given greater scrutiny. However, at this stage I support the intent of the legislation. I support the bill with amendment.

Dr HUGH McDERMOTT (Prospect) (12:34:54):

I speak in support of the Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Further Organised Crimes Reforms) Bill 2026. On a Thursday night in June, on a quiet street in Pemulwuy, 21-year-old Luke Manassa had just parked his car. A dedicated university student working in his family's business, Luke was visiting a mate at a home in my electorate of Prospect. Moments later, Luke was murdered. On Thursday 26 June 2025 Luke was stabbed, in what the police believe to have been a case of mistaken identity. Luke had no part in anyone's war. While the matter is still before the courts, it is believed that those responsible were hired on the orders of others. Criminals who order violence are never at the scene. They rely on silence and on evidence being withheld. Prosecuting them depends on two things: witnesses who speak and evidence that survives. The bill protects both. Our community will not forget Luke, and our thoughts remain with his family.

Organised crime and organised crime syndicates have changed. Today organised crime groups hide behind encrypted phones, intermediaries and witnesses who are too frightened to speak. It is important that our laws change to meet that evolving threat. The bill strengthens the hand of the NSW Crime Commission by doubling the penalties for those who refuse to cooperate with the commission. Government amendments will take it a step further, introducing an organised crime offence summons to ensure that devices or documents potentially involved can be secured the moment a summons is served. Organised crime is not a distant threat; it is real and is occurring on the streets of Western Sydney. The bill demonstrates our response—a continuing, aggressive and focused organised crime crackdown that builds on the reforms we passed in June. I acknowledge Premier Chris Minns, the Minister for Police and Counter-terrorism and the Attorney General for driving those important reforms. In particular, I acknowledge the officers of the NSW Crime Commission and the NSW Police Force and thank them for their work keeping our community safe.

I now address the key amendments in the bill. The Crime Commission Act 2012 grants the Crime Commission significant coercive powers. It can compel witnesses to attend, answer questions and produce documents. As it currently stands, those powers work only if suspects comply. Schedule 1 to the bill doubles the maximum penalties for offences of noncompliance with the commission's directions and processes. The new maximum penalties will range from 12 months to 10 years imprisonment. Our Government's view is clear: The current penalties are too low and do not work. A criminal network can make silence cheaper than the truth. When a witness weighs a light penalty against the threat of retribution, our community loses. The new penalties will neutralise that influence and will be in proportion with the crimes that the commission investigates. Because some offences under the Act will now exceed two years imprisonment, schedule 3 [2] adds them to table 2 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986.

Schedule 1 [16] amends section 85 of the Crime Commission Act to match, so that the prosecution can elect to proceed in the District Court. Contempt of the commission includes conduct like refusing to answer questions or disrupting a hearing. Schedule 1 [10] amends section 47C of the Crime Commission Act, so that where that contempt happens in the face or hearing of the commissioner, no summons is needed. A witness who defies the commission in the room can be dealt with without delay. Schedule 2 inserts new division 4B into part 5 of the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002, allowing a Local Court judge to issue a digital evidence access order for a device lawfully seized in an organised crime investigation, even without a search or crime scene warrant. Schedule 4 [1] replaces section 271A of the Road Transport Act 2013 so that New South Wales can join national face-matching services. Schedule 5 inserts new sections 261C to 261G into the Roads Act 1993, giving police access to unredacted toll camera images to support serious investigations into organised crime.

To strengthen this reform package, the Government has proposed additional powers for the NSW Crime Commission to stop organised criminals and their associates from destroying or hiding critical evidence. Currently, a summons can require a witness to bring a phone, document or thing when they appear before the commission. But there is no power to require that the item be handed to the officer serving the summons. In the commission's experience, that can result in the loss and destruction of evidence. An officer can knock on the door and a summons can be served, and between that knock and the Crime Commission hearing, a phone can be wiped of all relevant criminal information and evidence.

Government amendment No. 4 inserts schedule 1 [4B], which adds new section 29A to the Crime Commission Act, creating a new organised crime offence summons. That enables an executive officer of the commission to issue a summons where the summons is connected with the investigation of an organised crime offence and they believe, on reasonable grounds, that a delay may result in the concealment, destruction, modification or removal of the item, including the contents of a digital device, or serious prejudice to the investigation. The person served must immediately produce the item to the serving officer and give the officer access to any electronic device requested.

Under new section 29B, refusing or failing to comply without reasonable excuse will be an offence, carrying up to 40 penalty units, four years imprisonment, or both. Under schedule 1 [9A], inserted by Government amendment No. 6, it is also deemed contempt of the commission. Those amendments also target those who direct the violence. Government amendment No. 8 inserts schedule 1A, creating aggravated offences of conspiracy to murder and attempted murder under new sections 26A and 30A of the Crimes Act 1900, where the conduct is linked to organised crime. Both offences carry life imprisonment penalties.

The electorate of Prospect is home to a community of hardworking manufacturing workers, care and public service workers, small business owners, teachers, nurses, builders and students. They are hardworking families and individuals, and I could not be prouder to represent them. They go above and beyond, striving for the stability, security and future of their families. They should not have to face the threat of abhorrent acts of organised crime in their communities. Distressingly, what happened in Pemulwuy, as I mentioned at the start of my speech, was not isolated. It is part of an organised conflict playing out across Western Sydney.

Extension of time

In June 2025, following a shooting in Merrylands, a stolen getaway car allegedly crashed on Old Prospect Road in Greystanes, colliding with a car carrying a man and two young children. Weeks later, Taskforce Falcon, which brings together the State Crime Command and the NSW Crime Commission, executed search warrants in Greystanes. Police allege they seized cash, a shotgun, over a kilogram of cocaine and 14 mobile phones, linked to a network accused of supplying vehicles for organised crime. In September last year, just after midday on a Friday, shots were fired from one vehicle towards another on Victor Street in Greystanes. []

In November, shots were fired at a business on Mcilwraith Street in Wetherill Park in the early hours of the morning. That same night, the home of an elderly couple in nearby Bossley Park was targeted. Police described residents as highly traumatised. In March this year, a shot was allegedly fired at a family home on Mavis Street in Greystanes. This month, just beyond our border in Merrylands West, Joshua Macdonald, a 40-year-old tradie, was shot and murdered in a front yard. Police believe he was not the intended target. These are not random acts. They are calculated and they are escalating. Too often, teenagers and young people are being used as pawns by those who direct them from a distance. This is not happening somewhere else; it is happening in our suburbs and in our community. The families of our Prospect electorate deserve to feel safe in their homes, their businesses and their streets.

Lee v New South Wales Crime Commission

Behind almost every one of those attacks is a trail—messages sent, payments made and orders given. That trail lives on phones and in the memories of witnesses. That is where the evidence now lives. If a phone is wiped before a hearing, the trail back to those who ordered violence on our streets goes cold. That evidence must also stand up in court. In the 2013 High Court case of , a majority of the High Court—Chief Justice French, Justice Crennan, Justice Gageler and Justice Keane—upheld the commission's compulsory examination powers because Parliament had used clear words and built-in safeguards. The bill meets that standard. It contains clear words from this Parliament so that the commission's powers withstand challenge and those responsible for violence are held to account.

We recognise that these powers are strong. That is because they are necessary. However, we have also implemented safeguards to ensure that they are used fairly and appropriately. Under new section 39AA, inserted by schedule 1 [5B], the serving officer must explain that the person served may object, and that if they object or were not warned, the item will not be admissible in further proceedings. Schedule 1 [17] inserts new sections 87 and 88. The Law Enforcement Conduct Commission must keep those powers under scrutiny, and the commissioner must report annually. Both reports will be tabled in Parliament. Under item [18], the new summons powers cease to have effect after 12 months.

Organised crime depends on silence and on evidence that vanishes. The bill takes both away. It tells witnesses that obstruction carries a real penalty and a real price. It tells criminal networks that the evidence will be secured. It tells the families in the Prospect electorate, and families like Luke's, that this Government is on their side. I commend the bill to the House.

Ms JENNY LEONG (Newtown) (12:48:35):

On behalf of The Greens, I contribute to debate on the Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Further Organised Crimes Reforms) Bill 2026. It is clear that the violence that is occurring in our city due to organised crime is heartbreaking. The involvement of children in organised crime, particularly their involvement in violence as perpetrators and victims, is shocking and must be addressed at a societal level. Why are these kids engaged in these crimes? What are the underlying issues and where have we failed them? Are they from unsafe homes? Are they suffering from undiagnosed mental health issues? Is there a lack of money, food or financial support for them? Are they not getting the support services or guidance they need? What level of intergenerational trauma and disadvantage has occurred that we are seeing kids becoming vulnerable and engaging in these horrific acts of violence?

The Government absolutely needs to deal with the problem of organised crime. But just looking at the kids who have been caught up in it is failing to recognise the scale and size of the problem. Unfortunately, the Government is failing in many ways to tackle organised crime in the State. We all know that announcing another knee jerk law-and-order reaction can sometimes work when responding to the shock jocks and conservative media, but that response only goes so in keeping our community safe. We must look after our vulnerable kids and the people who are tragically caught up in the horrific crimes that we have seen play out in our city.

The question needs to be asked: Why is the Government failing to look into the areas where it knows that organised crime is flourishing and money is being generated? For example, in Parliament yesterday a briefing was held for members on dodgy labour hire companies currently active in New South Wales due to a failure to pass licensing reforms that are necessary to tackle modern slavery in our State. Those companies are directly linked to organised crime concerns. Members were briefed by the NSW Anti-slavery Commissioner, James Cockayne; the Secretary of Unions NSW, Mark Morey; the chair of the Australia South Sea Islanders; and Professor Jennifer Burn, Director of Anti‑Slavery Australia. The Anti-slavery Commissioner shared shocking information about dodgy labour hire firms using the personal details of exploited and vulnerable workers to set up false bank accounts through which money could be laundered. The Secretary of Unions NSW told us that more than 100 labour hire firms banned or sanctioned in other States are now operating in New South Wales with zero oversight as a result of the failure to regulate labour hire in this State.

It has been exposed that unregulated labour hire creates major risks of modern slavery in regional and rural New South Wales. But labour hire firms also operate across our city. Do we think that organised crime is not using the regulation-free zone of labour hire in the State to fill their coffers? There is ample evidence from Victoria on organised crime syndicates using construction labour hire firms. We know the construction industry in New South Wales is no better. Do we really think that organised crime syndicates are not taking advantage of our regulation‑free zone when it comes to the construction industry? The Government is failing to act on that urgent element of organised crime even after its caucus members have called for urgent action on it.

That is to say nothing of the links that have been exposed between organised crime and pokies. Gambling reform has been resisted by Labor governments at a State and Federal level when we know that the vulnerable are being used to launder money on an industrial scale. It is any wonder that organised crime is a problem in this State? Yet this Government and the Federal Labor Government cower from any gambling reform or significant labour hire reform to tackle organised crime. Instead, the Government has introduced a crime bill—and, indeed, will move amendments to that crime bill—that will seek to do serious harm to many in our community.

While we support some of the targeted amendments to improve the Government's responses to organised crime, it is important to state that we are concerned about elements that disproportionately infringe on civil liberties and could lead to the over-criminalisation of children and marginalised groups, including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. The NSW Council for Civil Liberties and the Aboriginal Legal Service NSW/ACT have issued a joint statement of concern with respect to the bill. In the joint statement the organisations rightly call out the risks to civil liberties and marginalised over-criminalised communities that the bill presents. It states:

The Bill is presented as a response to organised criminal activity. Though a legitimate public objective, any legislation which seeks to restrict civil liberties must be necessary, proportionate and limited to the purpose of which it was introduced. It also must have appropriate safeguards and oversight. We are concerned that the Bill confers broad and intrusive powers which could extend beyond its stated objectives. This creates a real risk that extraordinary powers introduced for exceptional circumstances may become normalised as ordinary tools of surveillance, and punishment. Moreover, the Bill risks expanding state power at the expense of established rights, including privacy, right to not self-incriminate, and freedom of association.

…

We submit that the NSW Parliament should not pass the Bill in its current form. At minimum, we submit that the most intrusive provisions of the Bill should be withdrawn or substantially amended, and that the Law Enforcement Conduct Commission (LECC) must undertake a mandatory review of the changes made to the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (LEPRA) under the bill.

My Greens colleagues in the other place will seek to amend the bill to address those concerns. On that basis, I will briefly set out some of the concerns, making it clear that we will not oppose the bill in its current form at the second reading stage, but we will have a lot more to say on the amendments to the bill that are foreshadowed. The changes to the Road Transport Act largely facilitate a face-matching service already in place under the Commonwealth Act, which The Greens opposed federally. The most concerning aspects of that schedule are the suspension of the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act and the regulation-making power for other face‑matching services, both of which my Greens colleagues in the other place will seek to remove via amendments.

The changes to access unredacted facial images reflect a practice by which private toll operators can already give unredacted facial images to certain authorised agencies if the contravention relates to the payment of a relevant toll. The expansion of those powers is somewhat limited to serious indictable offences, missing persons and coronial investigations, but the criteria of "prevent or lessen a serious threat to the life, or health or safety, of a person" is too broad and will, in essence, allow police to access an unredacted facial image whenever they can establish that a criminal offence may lessen a threat to a person's health. We also put on record our concerns about changes to the Crime Commission penalties and we do not support changes to allow maximum penalties to apply, regardless of the Criminal Procedure Act. Any offence that incurs a high penalty should be tried on indictment if the accused person or prosecutor elects as a matter of basic civil liberty.

Clearly, the Government must do more to address violence as a result of organised crime in our city and the impact it is having on communities. But we must be alert to knee-jerk reactions that further erode our civil liberties and attempt to target talking up the success of the NSW Police Force in catching four children caught up in this horror. Organised crime is the problem. Children do not engage in such activities unless we as a society have failed them. It is critical that we recognise that organised crime must be the target and that locking up more First Nations people, and vulnerable and disadvantaged people in our community is not the solution. We have seen the Minns Labor Government eager to ban political protest. We should not go down the path of condemning those who the system has failed to look after and care for. We need to target organised crime. There are clear ways to do that. That is why we will seek to amend and improve the bill in the other place. We will have more to say on the Government and Opposition amendments when they come before the House for debate later.

Ms JULIA FINN (Granville) (12:58:42):

I strongly support the Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Further Organised Crimes Reforms) Bill 2026. The bill seeks to address a lot of the technological and cultural changes that are happening with organised crime that have not only horrified people across Sydney but also have had an inordinate impact on the electorate that I represent, where we have seen many shootings, firebombings and murders. Yes, it is shocking that it is alleged that children are involved in some of these crimes. But once it gets to the crime of murder, the sympathy we may normally have for someone with a disadvantaged background who gets involved in crime is lessened significantly, because they still have their life and the person who was shot does not.

On 2 December, Joshua Macdonald was shot in Bruce Street in Merrylands West. He was a 40-year-old employee of Sydney Trains and a member of the Electrical Trades Union, visiting his friend and his friend's children, who witnessed him being shot in the driveway of their home, across the road from a school, at 3.15 p.m. I rang the school the next day. Thankfully all the kids had been picked up by 3.10 p.m. The house was opposite the bottom corner of the school, not at the front gate, so no kids at the school were exposed, but the kids who live at that house were.

Another shooting took place on 29 August in Randolph Street in Guildford. On 18 April there was a series of shootings and firebombings targeting Alameddine associates across Merrylands and South Wentworthville. On 24 April there were shootings in Clarence Street and Lockwood Street in Merrylands and Wentworthville. On 11 February a man was shot in the legs in O'Connor Street in Guildford, and more shots were fired in O'Neill Street shortly afterwards. On 10 February there was a shooting in Merrylands. On 10 January a man was shot dead in Newman Street in Merrylands.

Last year, in a crime that even shocked people overseas, as this was such big news, there was a shooting at the traffic lights on Woodville Road in Granville. Dawood Zakaria was shot and killed, and other associates of his were shot. That shocked everybody here. In 2022 Ghassan Amoun was shot and killed in South Wentworthville. In 2024 there was another attempted murder in South Wentworthville, outside a gym. In 2021 the father and son Salim and Toufik Hamze were shot as they got in a ute to go to work in Guildford. Also in 2021, Shady Kanj was shot and killed in Guildford. Every time this happens, it makes people in my electorate nervous, particularly with crimes like the one involving Joshua Macdonald, who was not the intended target. He just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, and he had his life tragically cut decades short.

We need these reforms in order to assist the police to crack down on organised crime. They have foiled a number of shootings before they happen and made over 800 arrests in the last year, but these reforms go to the heart of making sure that they can address some of the practical impediments they have faced. I speak in particular support of the amendments proposed to the Roads Act which permit the collection, storage and disclosure of unredacted toll camera images to assist in the investigation of serious criminal offences.

It is no secret that organised crime remains a significant threat in New South Wales and that crime networks are using complex methods to thwart police investigations and prosecutions. Fighting organised crime requires more than arrests and prosecutions; it demands a coordinated approach. Effective action against organised crime relies on strong partnerships between government agencies. When organisations such as the Police Force and Transport for NSW work together, they can pool their resources and intelligence to build effective criminal investigations. This aspect of the proposed bill builds on the Government's ongoing efforts to tackle organised crime by creating a stronger working relationship between the police and Transport, which will provide the police with stronger tools to protect public safety and keep communities safe.

The proposed amendments will help the police to collect critical intelligence to support investigations, identify and target organised crime groups and build stronger cases that contribute to successful prosecutions over the long term. During an investigation, the police must be able to reconstruct the movements and actions of those involved in criminal offending. Doing so is essential to establishing intent, identifying offenders and linking crucial evidence. By tracing the path of offenders before and after an offence, the police can identify associates, establish links between criminal actors and build a more complete picture of the offending conduct. Any gaps in intelligence could undermine the investigation and impede the successful prosecution of serious crimes. The ability to view inside a vehicle used during the commission of a crime will be a game changer for police investigations into serious and organised crime.

Currently toll camera images provided to the police are heavily redacted. As a result, important details about a vehicle's occupants are often concealed, reducing the images' effectiveness as a valuable investigative tool. The proposed amendments will provide the police with access to significant intelligence. The ability to see who is inside a vehicle can provide critical context that is often missing from an investigation. Toll camera images will allow them to determine not only who was driving but also who else was present, whether known associates were travelling together, and whether individuals linked to criminal activity were moving as a group. This can help investigators to distinguish between innocent and suspicious conduct, identify previously unknown connections, and focus investigative resources on the right individuals.

The proposed amendments will also assist in missing persons investigations, where time is often critical. Access to toll camera images can help the police to track a person's movements, identify the vehicle they were travelling in, establish their last known location and determine who may have been with them. This information can provide vital investigative leads, narrow search areas, accelerate response efforts and ultimately increase the likelihood of locating missing persons safely and quickly. The proposed amendments may also assist the police in circumstances where there is an immediate risk to the life, health or safety of a person, including a child. Timely access to toll camera images could help investigators to locate vulnerable persons, identify vehicles involved in potential abductions or welfare concerns, and track movements. In critical incidents, every minute matters. Access to this information could help the police to intervene sooner, prevent further harm and potentially save lives.

Criminals increasingly rely on technology and mobility to evade detection. These reforms will ensure that the police have access to the tools and information they need in order to identify offenders, track criminal activity, disrupt organised crime groups and bring those responsible before the courts. The proposed amendments will make better use of technology that is already in place and proven to assist in police investigations. The infrastructure and systems already exist. These reforms simply enable the police to leverage those capabilities in a more targeted way to prevent, detect and investigate serious criminal activity. Under the bill, toll camera images can be sought by the police only for a serious criminal investigation that relates to serious indictable offences, to locate a missing person, to prevent or reduce a serious threat to a person's life, health or safety, and certain coronial investigations.

These are not low-level offences. They are serious crimes that threaten public safety and present harm to our communities. As a parliament, we should ensure that the police have access to every appropriate tool available to identify offenders, investigate criminal activity and protect the public. Ultimately, the amendments to the Roads Act will ensure that the police can effectively utilise proven technology to investigate serious crime, strengthen prosecutions and enhance community safety, while maintaining appropriate safeguards and oversight. This Parliament has a responsibility to respond decisively to those who prey upon our community and threaten our safety for criminal purposes. These amendments assist the New South Wales police to do exactly that. I commend the bill to the House.

Mr JUSTIN CLANCY (Albury) (13:08:35):

I contribute to the debate on the Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Further Organised Crimes Reforms) Bill 2026. The Opposition supports this bill, but I will make something clear from the outset: The Liberals and The Nationals have for some time been calling for stronger action on organised crime. When we were in government, we legislated significant reforms to give the Police Force and the Crime Commission stronger tools to disrupt organised criminal networks. In 2022 the former Liberal-Nationals Government introduced a substantial package of organised crime reforms dealing with money laundering, unexplained wealth, dedicated encrypted criminal communication devices and access to digital evidence. The principle behind those reforms was straightforward then and remains straightforward today. Organised crime adapts, and our laws must adapt to keep ahead of them. Indeed, this bill builds upon that legislative framework.

We welcome further action and support the sensible measures in the bill, but we also seek to strengthen them where we believe the legislation needs to go further. There is an urgency to that work. As the member for Albury, I represent a community on the Victorian border. We watch Victorian television, read Victorian newspapers and follow Melbourne news every day. Sadly, we have watched increasingly disturbing reports coming out of Melbourne become commonplace. They include firebombings of businesses, kidnappings, home invasions and serious violence associated with organised criminal networks. Indeed, earlier this year Victoria Police said organised crime syndicates were commissioning young people to carry out firebombings at Melbourne hospitality venues. Police have made more than 65 arrests and laid more than 350 charges associated with arson attacks, kidnappings and home invasions.

Importantly, Victoria's police commissioner said their priority was to work their way up the criminal hierarchy to identify those directing the crimes. That is the real challenge of modern organised crime. It is not simply identifying the person who pulled the trigger, lit the fire or committed the assault. It is reaching the people further up the criminal hierarchy—the people who commissioned the violence, financed it, recruited others to carry it out, and used technology and layers of associates to distance themselves from the crimes they orchestrated. For those of us living on the border, Melbourne is not some distant city. We see that news every night. People in my community would be horrified to see that type of organised criminal violence take root in Sydney. Yet what we are seeing in Melbourne is now appearing in New South Wales, and it is appearing on this Government's watch.

Earlier this month, two men with no known links to organised crime were killed in separate suspected mistaken identity shootings in Sydney. That should concern every member of this House. What we have witnessed in Melbourne cannot be allowed to become normalised in Sydney. We cannot wait until organised violence becomes entrenched before we act. That brings me to the substance of the bill. The bill strengthens the coercive powers available to the NSW Crime Commission. It increases the maximum penalty for failing to attend or answer questions when summoned as a witness. It doubles the maximum imprisonment term for giving false or misleading evidence at a commission hearing from five to 10 years. It strengthens penalties for unlawfully publishing or disclosing commission evidence and for obstructing or disrupting the commission. We support those measures.

The NSW Crime Commission exists because sophisticated organised crime cannot always be investigated using conventional methods alone. If Parliament gives the commission coercive powers to penetrate sophisticated criminal networks, those powers must have meaningful consequences behind them. The bill also creates a new digital evidence access order specifically for organised crime investigations. Where police have lawfully seized a device and reasonably suspect that data contained on it is connected with or relevant to an organised crime offence, they will be able to apply for an order requiring reasonable assistance to access that evidence. Importantly, this is not an unfettered power. An eligible issuing officer must be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds concerning the lawful seizure of the device, the relevance of the data and the connection of the person concerned to the organised crime offence.

Once issued, an order can require reasonable and necessary assistance to access or copy data, including assistance to access data protected by biometric security. These provisions matter because the criminal world has changed. The people directing criminal activity do not necessarily need to be at the scene of the crime. Indeed, as the Commissioner of Police has observed, they do not even need to be in Australia. A direction can be given electronically. Someone else can be recruited to carry it out. Communications can be encrypted. Those sitting higher in the criminal hierarchy can put layer after layer between themselves and the offending. Our laws have to be capable of penetrating those layers.

That is why the Opposition will seek to strengthen this bill further when it comes to encrypted criminal communications. These amendments build on the reforms introduced by the former Liberals‑Nationals Government in 2022. The statutory review of those reforms identified concerns raised by the NSW Police Force about the existing definition of a dedicated encrypted criminal communication device. At present, the definition can depend upon establishing modifications to hardware or software that alters a device's factory operating system. But technology has moved on. Organised criminals do not necessarily need a purpose-built, modified device when conventional forms of encryption can be used to facilitate criminal communications and defeat law enforcement detection.

Our amendments therefore focus on the conduct that matters: encrypted communication between people reasonably suspected of serious criminal activity being used for the purpose of defeating law enforcement detection. Importantly, this is not directed at the ordinary, lawful use of encrypted communications. That is how legislation should evolve. Listen to our police, understand how organised criminal behaviour is changing, and make sure our laws keep pace.

The bill also deals with the use of toll camera images. Again, we support giving police the tools they genuinely need. We support access to toll camera images for the investigation and prosecution of serious indictable offences; to locate missing people; to prevent or lessen threats to life, health and safety; and for specified coronial investigations. But keeping pace with organised crime does not mean giving government powers without appropriate limits. Strong powers should be directed towards the serious conduct that justifies them in the first place. This bill expressly permits toll cameras to photograph not only vehicles and drivers but also passengers, including passengers under 16 years of age. It also allows relevant information to be used more broadly in connection with enforcement of the Roads Act and its regulations. That goes further than is necessary for the organised crime and community safety purposes at the heart of these reforms.

The Opposition will therefore seek to remove that broader use of unredacted toll camera images for general enforcement of the Roads Act and regulations, while preserving access for serious crime, missing persons, serious threats and coronial purposes. We will also seek a higher penalty where toll camera information involving a child is unlawfully used, and where that information is unlawfully used or intended to be used for stalking. That is an important balance: Give police the tools they need to investigate serious crime but ensure that significant powers involving peoples' images and personal information have appropriate limits and safeguards. Organised crime does not respect borders. Increasingly, it does not require those directing the crime to even be in the same country as those carrying it out.

From Albury, we have watched what has unfolded in Melbourne. Those scenes have become disturbingly familiar stories on the nightly news. As I have said before, our community would be horrified to see that become normal in Sydney, but that is exactly what is happening. Therefore, the task for this Parliament is clear: disrupt these networks before they become further entrenched; give police and the Crime Commission the tools to reach beyond the person committing the offence to those organising, directing and profiting from it; and make sure our laws keep pace with the technology criminals use to conceal what they are doing. The Liberals and The Nationals acted on organised crime when we were in government.

The 2022 reforms provide part of the foundation upon which this bill now builds. We continue to put forward reforms in opposition. We support sensible measures. We will seek to strengthen the bill with targeted amendments at the consideration in detail stage, because the objective cannot be simply to respond to organised crime after the violence has occurred. It must be to identify, disrupt and dismantle the networks behind it. We should heed the warning from Melbourne: Act now and make sure that organised crime does not stay one step ahead of us.

Mr MARK COURE (Oatley) (13:18:39):

The Opposition supports the Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Further Organised Crimes Reforms) Bill 2026 and stronger laws to disrupt organised crime. The bill builds on the organised crime reforms introduced by the previous Liberal-Nationals Government in 2022. Every person in New South Wales has the right to feel safe in their home, on their street and in their local community. Sadly, too many families no longer feel that way. Organised crime is becoming more brazen, gangland shootings are happening in suburban streets, and innocent people are being caught in the crossfire that we see day in and day out. That is why the Opposition supports the bill and supports stronger laws to disrupt organised crime.

As I mentioned, the bill builds on reforms introduced by the previous Liberal-Nationals Government in 2022. The reforms give police and the NSW Crime Commission stronger powers to target organised criminal networks. But organised criminals do not stand still. They change their methods quickly, exploit new technology and look for new ways to avoid detection. Our laws must keep pace. Yesterday in the public interest debate I acknowledged the men and women of the NSW Police Force, particularly the officers serving in my local area command, the St George Police Area Command, and the Campsie command. Every day our police officers put themselves in harm's way to protect our community. They confront dangerous criminals, respond to violent incidents and support families during some of the most difficult moments of their lives.

They deserve our respect, they deserve our support but, most importantly, they deserve a government that backs them with the laws, powers and resources they need to keep people safe. This year alone there have been more than 52 gangland shootings across New South, including three mistaken identity killings. That is not just a number on a page; behind every incident is a victim, a community or a family left behind with the consequences. There is a mother losing a child, a family losing a son, an innocent person being killed simply because criminals targeted the wrong house, car or person. The Government is already on record saying that gangland crime was not out of control, but tell that to the families who have lost their loved ones and to residents across south-west and Western Sydney.

The people of New South Wales have heard a lot of excuses, and they want action. The bill takes several important steps. It increases penalties for people who refuse to attend or answer questions before the NSW Crime Commission. It increases the maximum penalty to 10 years imprisonment for giving false or misleading evidence to the Crime Commission. It also strengthens the penalty for unlawfully disclosing Crime Commission evidence or deliberately obstructing its work. Those powers, of course, must have teeth. There is little point giving the Crime Commission the power to compel evidence if criminals believe they can just ignore it, lie or frustrate an investigation without facing serious consequences.

The bill also creates a pathway for police to access digital evidence held on devices already lawfully seized during organised crime investigations. Today, phones and other digital devices can contain crucial evidence about criminal networks, planned attacks, illegal firearms and the movement of illicit money. Police must have the lawful ability to obtain that evidence with proper independent oversight and safeguards. The Opposition also supports appropriate access to toll camera images when investigating serious indictable offences, locating missing people, responding to serious threats to life or safety, and accessing coronial investigations. However, as we have heard from previous speakers, those powers must be properly targeted.

The Opposition will move targeted amendments to strengthen the bill. Our first amendment will broaden the definition of a dedicated encrypted criminal communication device. This responds directly to concerns raised by the NSW Police Force following its review of the 2022 organised crime reforms. The current definition risks being too narrow because it focuses on whether a device's hardware operating system has been modified. Criminals do not necessarily need a particular or modified phone. They can use ordinary devices and conventional encryption to conceal serious criminal activity. Our amendment focuses on the real issue of encrypted communications being used between people reasonably suspected of serious criminal activity to avoid detection by law enforcement. It will target organised criminals, not the ordinary, lawful use of encrypted messaging by members of the public.

We will also amend the bill to prevent the broad use of unredacted toll camera images for the general enforcement of the Roads Act and its regulations. Access will remain available for serious criminal investigations, missing persons cases, serious threats and coronial matters. That strikes the right balance between giving police the evidence they need and protecting the privacy of ordinary motorists. We will also propose tougher penalties when toll camera information is unlawfully used in connection with a child or for stalking. The maximum penalty of these aggravated offences should be 200 penalty units. Information showing a person's location or movements is highly sensitive when that information involves a child or is used to stalk someone for whom the consequences can be particularly serious. Those tougher penalties must reflect that risk.

Strengthening the law is only one part of the solution. We must also stop young people being recruited into serious crime. Adults who exploit vulnerable children and recruit them to carry out gangland attacks must face the full force of the law. We on this side of the House recently announced "adult crime, adult time" laws, which will be introduced in our first 100 days, if we win office next year in March. The bill is heading in the right direction. It is about protecting our families and community, and it is about backing our police. Certainly, the people in my electorate and communities across New South Wales deserve to feel safe in their homes and on their streets. They deserve a government that takes community safety seriously. Therefore, the Opposition supports the bill. We will seek to strengthen it through sensible, targeted amendments. We on this side of the House will always put victims, families and community safety first.

Mr BRENDAN MOYLAN (Northern Tablelands) (13:26:15):

I support the Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Further Organised Crimes Reforms) Bill 2026 and also indicate my support for a number of Opposition amendments that seek to strengthen the bill's operation and improve its drafting. Organised criminal networks are sophisticated, well resourced and increasingly adaptable. They are quick to exploit technological developments and equally quick to identify gaps, ambiguities or limitations in legislative schemes. Parliament therefore has a responsibility to ensure that law enforcement agencies are equipped with powers that are both effective and proportionate. The role of criminal law is not merely punitive. It is preventative. It seeks to deter offending, disrupt criminal enterprises and protect the public from harm.

When dealing with organised crime, that preventative function becomes particularly important because the consequences of inaction are significant. Organised criminal groups are often involved in the trafficking of illicit drugs, large-scale fraud, money laundering and other serious criminal conduct that impacts communities across New South Wales. As a regional member in this place, I can say that organised crime is not confined to metropolitan Sydney. The proceeds of organised criminal activity flow right across the State, and the social harm associated with drugs, violence and criminal exploitation is felt just as acutely in regional communities as it is anywhere else. For that reason, the Opposition supports measures that strengthen the ability of the Crime Commission and law enforcement agencies to investigate and disrupt criminal networks.

The bill contains a number of worthwhile reforms. The first relates to attendance and cooperation before the Crime Commission, which performs a very unique and important statutory function in New South Wales. It is not a conventional investigative body. It possesses coercive powers because Parliament has recognised that ordinary investigative methods are not always sufficient when dealing with sophisticated organised criminal enterprises. This bill increases the penalty for failing to attend or answer questions before the Crime Commission. This is an entirely appropriate reform. The effectiveness of any coercive examination regime ultimately depends upon compliance. If individuals refuse to answer questions with impunity or are prepared to disregard lawful notices, the utility of those powers is significantly diminished.

The bill also increases the maximum penalty to 10 years imprisonment for providing false or misleading evidence before the commission. Again, this is a sensible reform. Providing false evidence to a body charged with investigating serious criminal conduct strikes directly at the administration of justice. It impedes investigation, frustrates the identification of offenders and undermines confidence in the integrity of the commission's processes. The proposed increase properly reflects the seriousness of that conduct. The bill further strengthens offences relating to the unlawful publication, disclosure or dissemination of Crime Commission information. Those provisions are also appropriate and important.

Investigations into organised crime frequently involve sensitive intelligence, covert methodologies, confidential sources and operational information. Unauthorised disclosures have the capacity to compromise investigations, place individuals at risk and provide criminal organisations with advance warning of investigative activities. The Opposition supports stronger protections in that regard. Likewise, the bill strengthens penalties relating to obstruction of the functions of the Crime Commission and streamlines procedures relating to contempt. Those are not simply administrative reforms. They are reforms directed at ensuring that the commission can effectively carry out its statutory functions without interference, delay or deliberate obstruction.

The bill also increases the maximum penalty for failing to comply with a digital evidence access order from five years to seven years imprisonment. That increase reflects the reality of modern offending. Criminal activity increasingly leaves a digital footprint. Mobile devices, encrypted communications, cloud storage and electronic records frequently contain evidence that is central to the prosecution of a serious criminal offence. A court-authorised order requiring access to that material ought to be respected, and deliberate noncompliance ought to attract a significant consequence.

TEMPORARY SPEAKER (Mr Michael Kemp):

It being 1.30 p.m., in accordance with the resolution of the House this day, debate is interrupted. I set down resumption of the debate as an order of the day for a later time. I shall now leave the Chair. The House will resume at 2.30 p.m.

Mr BRENDAN MOYLAN (Northern Tablelands) (14:30:58):

I continue my contribution to debate on the Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Further Organised Crimes Reforms) Bill 2026. The Opposition also supports amendments allowing police to require reasonable assistance to access data protected by biometric security measures. Technology should not become a shield behind which organised criminals can hide evidence of criminal conduct. The law must continue to evolve alongside technological developments if it is to remain effective. Whilst the Opposition supports these measures, we also believe the bill can be strengthened further. Accordingly, we will be moving a number of amendments. The first amendment concerns the definition of a "dedicated encrypted criminal communication device". This amendment arises directly from concerns identified by the NSW Police Force during the statutory review of the organised crime reforms enacted in 2022. As currently drafted, the legislative framework requires proof that a device incorporates hardware modifications or software that alters the factory operating system. The Opposition believes that requirement is unnecessarily restrictive.

The practical reality is that organised criminal groups no longer rely exclusively on purpose-built modified devices. They increasingly utilise conventional devices operating sophisticated encrypted communications systems. The question should not be whether the device has undergone a particular technical modification. Rather, the question should be whether it is being used as a tool to facilitate organised criminal activity. Our amendment therefore removes this unnecessary technical limitation and ensures the legislation remains capable of responding to the methods currently employed by sophisticated criminal networks. Importantly, it does not criminalise the ordinary and lawful use of encrypted communications. Millions of Australians use encrypted communications daily for entirely legitimate reasons, including business, banking, personal privacy, cybersecurity and even messaging the member for Tamworth. The amendment is directed towards criminal use, not legitimate use.

The second amendment concerns the collection and use of toll camera information. There is broad community support for law enforcement agencies accessing information where it is necessary to investigate serious criminal activity or locate missing persons. However, the exercise of investigative powers must always remain proportionate to the purpose for which they are created. The Government has repeatedly provided assurances that these powers are directed towards serious matters. If that is the intention, then the legislation ought to reflect that intention clearly. The Opposition will therefore move amendments removing the broad ability to utilise unredacted toll camera images for general enforcement of the Roads Act and associated regulations.

Put simply, the Opposition does not believe that these provisions should allow for road transport enforcement or infringements under the Roads Act. The purpose of the amendment is to ensure that the statutory power is appropriately confined and cannot gradually expand beyond the rationale originally advanced for its creation. As legislators, we must constantly balance two important public interests. One is community safety, the other is the protection of individual privacy and civil liberties. Neither objective should automatically displace the other. Good legislation achieves an appropriate balance between both.

The final amendments deal with unlawful access to or misuse of toll camera information. The Opposition proposes stronger penalties where such information is unlawfully used in circumstances involving a child. We also propose corresponding higher penalties where the information is unlawfully used, or intended to be used, for stalking. Those amendments recognise that not all privacy breaches are equal. Information capable of identifying the location or movement of a child creates obvious and serious risks. Similarly, the misuse of location information for stalking purposes can facilitate intimidation, harassment and serious criminal offending. In both circumstances, the potential consequences for victims justify a stronger legislative response. The amendments therefore seek to align the available penalties with the seriousness of the harm that may result from misuse of that information. The amendments foreshadowed by the Opposition are consistent with those principles. For those reasons, the Opposition supports the bill and commends the proposed amendments to the House.

Mr KEVIN ANDERSON (Tamworth) (14:35:35):

I contribute to debate on the Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Further Organised Crimes Reforms) Bill 2026. I focus on the encryption component of the bill. Organised crime does not stand still, and neither can our laws. Technology has transformed the way we live, work and communicate. But just as technology creates opportunities for our community, it also creates opportunities for criminals. Increasingly, organised criminal networks are using encrypted communication devices and applications to hide their activities from law enforcement. They use these technologies to coordinate drug trafficking, money laundering, violent crime and other serious criminal activity, believing that encryption can provide a digital shield between them and the police. We cannot allow technology to become a safe haven for criminal activity.

Encryption itself is an important and legitimate technology. Every day we rely on secure communications to protect our banking, business activity and personal information. The challenge is ensuring that sophisticated criminals cannot exploit those protections to operate with impunity. That means our law enforcement agencies must continually stay at the forefront of technology. Criminal organisations adapt quickly. They change devices, applications and communication methods. When one network is compromised, they look for another. Law enforcement therefore needs the expertise, technology, training and appropriate legal powers necessary to investigate serious crime in an increasingly digital world. We cannot have a situation where police are always one technological generation behind the criminals they are trying to catch. Investment in cyber capability, digital forensics, specialist investigators and cooperation between State, Federal and international agencies is becoming just as important as many traditional policing capabilities. At the same time, these powers must operate within the law, with appropriate safeguards and oversight. Protecting the community from serious crime and protecting the legitimate privacy and security of law-abiding citizens are both important responsibilities.

The bill is a result of the concerns raised by police during the statutory review of the 2022 organised crime reforms, tabled in May this year. The main police concerns were that the legislation was too narrowly tied to specially modified encrypted devices. Police said organised crime groups were also using more conventional forms of encryption that might not involve the hardware or software modifications required by the statutory definition of a "dedicated encrypted criminal communication device", or DECCD. Police recommended considering a broader definition so legislation could keep pace with changing criminal technology. That is why the Opposition foreshadows an amendment to the bill to broaden the definition of a dedicated encrypted criminal communication device. The amendment removes the need to prove that a device uses hardware modifications or software that alters the device's factory operating system and focuses instead on encrypted communication used between persons reasonably suspected of serious criminal activity to defeat law enforcement detection.

Transcription in progress…