HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1)
2025-11-25 Daily Xml
Contents
Xml

Bills

Summary Offences (High Risk Missing Persons) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 13 November 2025.)

The Hon. N.J. CENTOFANTI (Leader of the Opposition) (11:03): I rise to speak on the Summary Offences (High Risk Missing Persons) Amendment Bill 2025, introduced by the Attorney-General on 13 November. This bill would amend the Summary Offences Act 1953 to provide police with an additional proportionate set of tools for responding to high-risk missing person cases. These reforms are designed to support rapid and lawful search activity where there is a vulnerable person missing and where urgent action may be required, even in the absence of any suspected criminality.

The bill closely follows the Queensland legislative model, which was recently reviewed. That review found that while the powers are rarely invoked when they are needed they can be critical to progressing an investigation and locating a missing person swiftly. Clause 3 would amend section 83C to allow a senior police officer to authorise entry to a specified premise, vehicle, vessel or place for up to 48 hours for the purpose of investigating and taking necessary action to locate a high-risk missing person. A high-risk missing person is defined as a missing child under 14 or any individual whom police reasonably believe may suffer serious harm if not found urgently.

Clause 4 would insert new section 83D, allowing a senior police officer to seek a warrant from a judge in the same circumstances. A warrant under this provision could remain in force for up to 90 days, ensuring police retain ongoing lawful authority in more complex and extended searches. South Australia Police have advised that, informed by Queensland's experience, they consider these powers to be a valuable, tightly bounded tool, rarely used but essential when time is critical. For these reasons, and noting the safeguards and the clear public interest in enabling police to rapidly locate vulnerable people, the Liberal Party will be supporting the bill.

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS (11:05): I rise to speak in support of the Summary Offences (High Risk Missing Persons) Amendment Bill on behalf of the Greens. I understand the bill before us today will introduce another proportionate measure to assist police in finding some of the most vulnerable members of our community. The bill will provide police with additional powers to locate a child, a person with a cognitive, intellectual, neurological, physical or psychiatric impairment; the person's ability to interact safely with other persons or in an unfamiliar environment; and whether the person is suspected of being lost within a particular area, the climate or other environmental factors relevant to the area.

The bill will ensure that police can search a premises, vehicle or other place when they have information that may be relevant to the missing person's disappearance and locating their whereabouts. I am sure it goes without saying that all of us in this chamber want to give police as many powers as possible to help them in being able to locate vulnerable people in our community when they are missing. Of course, that is something that causes a huge amount of anxiety and distress to families, so I certainly support the government's efforts to strengthen some of the powers that are given to police to assist them in that important work.

The Hon. C. BONAROS (11:06): I rise to speak in support of the Summary Offences (High Risk Missing Persons) Amendment Bill for the same reasons that have been outlined by other honourable members. During the briefing, it was brought home to us in particular how important that first 48 hours is in a search for a missing person, and this bill certainly goes a long way in terms of assisting in that regard.

I note there are a couple of other instances where police do have similar powers to those being proposed under this bill. Running through with the government the sorts of scenarios where you could anticipate those critical first 48 hours, and what sort of situations this could arise in, a rural property is, of course, a perfect example. You might need to gain entry to a property. It is rural and someone might not be there. There are a host of reasons why it might be difficult to gain access. The obvious issue is consent to gain access to a property. Where we know there is a dead body or someone requiring medical assistance, SAPOL already has these powers. I see this as an obvious extension of those powers where we have a person, and particularly a young person, who is missing.

For those reasons, and I am sure we will go through more as this bill progresses, I support the intent of this bill. I am not concerned about issues of overstepping or overreach in relation to peak police powers, because we do have similar powers in other critical areas as well, and there has been, as I said, a host of reasons why this sort of legislation might be needed, particularly in the first 48 hours, after which I understand we would need to seek a court order for a subsequent extension of those 48 hours. It is with that in mind that I indicate my support for this bill.

The Hon. R.P. WORTLEY (11:09): The bill proposes to amend section 83C of the Summary Offences Act 1953 to authorise police to exercise certain powers in relation to high-risk missing person investigations. Specifically, it allows for a senior police officer to authorise an officer to enter and search a premises, vehicle or other place where police reasonably suspect that (a) a high-risk missing person may be in or on the premises, vehicle or place, or (b) that the entry into or on the premises, vehicle or place may provide information about the person's disappearance.

The bill defines a missing person as anyone who is reported missing to police, whose whereabouts are unknown and where there are concerns for the safety and welfare of that person. The bill defines a high-risk missing person as a missing person under the age of 14 years, or a missing person who a police officer reasonably suspects may suffer serious harm if not found as quickly as possible.

An authorisation given by a senior police officer will remain in place for 48 hours until the high-risk missing person is located or the authorisation is revoked by a senior officer—whichever is sooner. There is also scope for police to apply to a Supreme Court judge for a warrant to confirm the exercise of the police authorisation up to a period of 90 days, with the power for this period to be extended.

The background of this is that the Summary Offences Act already contains a number of provisions which authorise police to enter or search a premises in connection with a missing person investigation, including the power to enter and search any premises pursuant to a general search warrant where police reasonably suspect an offence has or will be committed on the premises or for a senior police officer to authorise an officer to enter a premise where they reasonably suspect that an occupant of the premises has died and their body is on the premises, or that an occupant is otherwise in need of medical or other assistance.

The bill addresses a potential gap that has been identified in relation to police search powers for missing persons. Specifically, the concern is that, in circumstances where the police do not reasonably suspect that a crime has been committed and police do not otherwise have consent to search a place, there is no authority for police to enter and search for information that may be relevant to the missing person's disappearance and locating their whereabouts.

In 2018, Queensland became the first jurisdiction to provide police with express statutory powers to conduct searches where a person is missing and at high risk. The 2024 review of part 3A of the Queensland act, conducted by the Queensland Crime and Corruption Commission, relevantly found that in the first five years of the powers being in effect, police officers used them in 16 missing persons investigations to assist in locating 22 people.

The Hon. S.L. GAME (11:12): I rise to speak on the government's Summary Offences (High Risk Missing Persons) Amendment Bill 2025. The Attorney-General has said this proposal is intended to address a potential deficiency in relation to police search powers for missing persons. Currently, the authority for police to enter and search a premises, vehicle or other place is limited to circumstances where police reasonably suspect that a crime has been committed.

Under this proposed amendment to section 83C of the Summary Offences Act, police will be given special powers of entry where a senior police officer suspects, on reasonable grounds, that a high-risk missing person is located within a specified place or premises or information about that missing person may be obtained by police entry. A high-risk missing person is defined as someone who has been reported missing and is either under the age of 14 years or a police officer reasonably suspects that the missing person may suffer serious harm if not located quickly.

The current act only provides police with special powers of entry if an officer suspects, on reasonable grounds, that an occupant of the premises has died and their body is in the premises or the occupant is in need of medical or other assistance. This proposal extends these special entry powers to include a vehicle or vessel or specified place for the purpose of investigating, rather than limiting these powers to provide medical assistance or retrieve a dead body from the occupant's premises.

The justification for these additional powers is to ensure that police have all the necessary tools and powers they need to keep our community safe. When referring to similar legislation currently operating in Queensland, the Attorney-General stated that these special entry powers were, however, rarely needed. Consequently, it is important to ask why these special powers are needed now and what community concern or incident has caused the government to bring this bill before the chamber today.

As stated by the Attorney-General, these powers are a valuable tool to progress missing persons investigations. This statement indicates that the primary consideration in this proposal is not about any growing community concern but rather about empowering police with an extra investigative tool that will not require a search warrant. While the authority for police to enter without a warrant will only remain in place for 48 hours, the only justification required to exercise these powers of entry will be the reasonable suspicion of a senior police officer. A senior police officer may apply to a judge for a high-risk missing person warrant but this is only required after the 48 hours has expired.

While the need for police to act urgently in limited circumstances is sometimes justified and necessary, there does not appear to be sufficient justification for these powers to extend to high-risk missing persons. It remains unclear under what circumstances a member of the public would be unable to or refuse to provide police with the consent to enter their premises to assist a high-risk missing person that is not currently covered by the medical assistance provision under the current act. Alternatively, if police reasonably suspect that a crime has been committed, they already have that authority to enter.

Under the Queensland legislation, these powers of entry are only to be used as a last resort after police have explored all other options. The Queensland model also inserted a mandatory review of the legislation, which has not been included in the proposal before us today. While I am open to supporting this bill to assist police in their duty to the public, I have expressed concern about the justification for this extension of police entry powers under section 83C and the absence of any safeguard beyond a senior police officer's reasonable suspicion. When these are combined with the absence of any statutory review, I do have some hesitation but am willing to listen to the debate.

The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Deputy Premier, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, Attorney-General, Minister for Industrial Relations and Public Sector, Special Minister of State) (11:16): I thank members for their contributions and the indications of support for this important piece of legislation. I look forward to the committee stage.

Bill read a second time.

Committee Stage

Bill taken through committee without amendment.

Third Reading

The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Deputy Premier, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, Attorney-General, Minister for Industrial Relations and Public Sector, Special Minister of State) (11:18): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Bill read a third time and passed.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT