Summary Offences Amendment (Police Memorial Offences) Bill 2025

Ms KAREN McKEOWN ( Penrith ) ( 12:22 :53 ): As I was saying, in relation to the acts of vandalism that have already occurred on police walls of remembrance, the bill is extremely important because those acts cause pain to the families of officers who gave their lives in service to the people of New South Wales, distress serving and former officers, and offend a community that rightly expects places of remembrance to be treated with dignity and respect. Police memorials pay tribute to the bravery of those who dedicate their lives to protecting, serving and keeping every one of our communities safe. Importantly, I recognise all the fine officers of the Nepean Area Command and Superintendent Trent King and offer a heartfelt thanks on behalf of our communities. I also thank them for the invitations I regularly receive to meet with probationary constables following their attestations, have a chat in general and welcome them to our community

Extending the nuisance and offensive conduct offence to police memorials has a clear policy justification. War memorials and police memorials serve a similar purpose: as solemn sites for reflection, remembrance and paying respect for sacrifices made and lives lost. Accordingly, nuisances, offensive acts and indecent acts committed in relation to police memorials have the potential to cause similar harm to the community as equivalent acts committed in relation to war memorials or interment sites. Extending the section 8 (3) offence to police memorials will also act as a deterrent for that conduct, while playing an important symbolic role by reflecting the significance of police memorials to the New South Wales community. The harm is similar, the impact is similar and the need for protection is the same. Extending those offences to police memorials therefore promotes consistency, fairness and common sense within our legal framework.

The bill also plays an important symbolic role. Law is not only about penalties; it is also about values. By explicitly protecting police memorials, this Parliament is recognising the significance of those sites to the people of New South Wales and affirming the respect owed to those who serve and those who have paid the ultimate price in that service. It is also worth noting that the bill sits alongside recent government action to strengthen protections for war memorials. The Government recently passed the Crimes Legislation Amendment (War Memorial Offences) Bill 2025, which introduced an aggravated property damage offence where the property is a war memorial, and amended the Summary Offences Act 1988 to introduce a discretionary compensation order where a person is charged with an offence under section 8 of the Act. The Summary Offences Amendment (Police Memorial Offences) Bill 2025 is a logical and principled extension of that work.

Importantly, consultation has occurred. The NSW Police Force was consulted on the bill and supports the proposed amendments. That support reflects an understanding of both the practical need for legal clarity and the symbolic importance of explicitly recognising police memorials in the legislation. The bill is modest in terms of length but not in terms of meaning. It strengthens the law, clarifies expectations, deters disrespectful conduct and, importantly, honours the memory of police officers who have lost their lives protecting all of our communities. For those reasons, I commend the bill to the House and thank the member for Barwon for bringing the bill forward.

Mr PHILIP DONATO ( Orange ) ( 12:27 :29 ): I make a brief contribution to debate on the Summary Offences Amendment (Police Memorial Offences) Bill 2025 introduced by my good friend and colleague the member for Barwon. I support the bill. I note that members of the Police Association and the NSW Police Force were in Parliament earlier today. No doubt they have taken a specific interest in this particular bill. The bill ensures that police memorials are treated the same as war memorials across the State of New South Wales. In 2023, the police memorial in The Domain, a short distance from Parliament, was vandalised and damaged. The bill will reflect the seriousness of those offences and give police memorials the same support and level of significance as war memorials.

The member for Barwon and the member for Penrith raised valid points. Policing is a unique occupation. Police go to work every single day not knowing if they will return home and see their families again. The job is often spontaneous. We saw that at Bondi and in other instances in recent times. They go to work and 99 times out of 100 it will be a routine day. But there is always the slight chance that they will get called to respond to a domestic violence incident, a public order incident or a public shooting incident, as we saw recently. They never know. Police are forced to respond quickly, put themselves at risk and take appropriate action. They put their lives on the line, placing themselves in harm's way when other people are retreating. That is the very nature of policing. I say that from my prior experience. I worked with a couple of officers who ended up being killed in the line of duty. One of them was Senior Constable James Affleck—or Jim, as he was known. He was tragically killed many years ago on the Hume Highway, in the electorate of the member for Campbelltown. The overpass where it happened has been named after him. He was a highway patrol officer. I worked with him at Macquarie Fields and he subsequently transferred to Campbelltown.

Jim was the consummate police officer. He would rock up to work, his shoes spit polished and his attire impeccable. His car was always clean. Jim treated people professionally, courteously and with the upmost respect. He was highly regarded by everybody. I still remember the day he was killed. He was struck by a stolen vehicle that was involved in a police pursuit. He was in the process of throwing out some road spikes on the Hume Highway just near Campbelltown. The driver tried to avoid the spikes, veered off the road and struck Jim, ultimately killing him. That was a very sad and tragic day. It demonstrated to those of us who were working in the region how dangerous policing can be at any point in time. In Orange there is a remembrance plaque for Constable William Havilland, who was a member of the NSW Police Force in the 1860s. He was shot by a bushranger, which was a danger back in the day. His plaque is on the outside of the Orange Police Station, adjacent to the flagpole on Bing Street.

As I said, this bill ensures that police memorials are protected in the same way as war memorials—that memorials honouring the police men and women who have given their lives to protect their local communities, to protect their State, are treated in the same manner as those of war veterans. It is abhorrent conduct for any person to cause damage to any memorial, let alone a war memorial or police memorial, whether through vandalism or graffiti, and it should not be tolerated. This Parliament needs to send a strong, clear message of deterrence and denunciation of such conduct. This bill does that. I congratulate my colleague the member for Barwon on picking up this important issue. I commend the bill to the House.

Mr DAVID HARRIS ( Wyong—Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Treaty, Minister for Gaming and Racing, Minister for Veterans, Minister for Medical Research, and Minister for the Central Coast) (12:32:56): I commend the member for Barwon for bringing the Summary Offences Amendment (Police Memorial Offences) Bill 2025 to the House. As the Minister for Veterans, I have the opportunity to spend a lot of time at different memorials across the State. I know the importance of those memorials. They are the heart of our local communities and a solemn place for our veterans. That is why the Government was very pleased earlier this year to increase penalties for vandalism or destruction of war memorials. It is apt that the member for Barwon has introduced this particular bill because, in the community's mind, police memorials and war memorials are similar—they are places that honour the brave men and women who have put on a uniform every day and placed themselves at risk to keep us safe. Like our veterans, the members of the NSW Police Force should be honoured for their service and police memorials should not be desecrated.

I think every member would agree that it is very important to have memorials or symbols of service for our fallen police officers. The member for Orange spoke about a police officer who was killed in the line of duty and has a bridge named after him. I draw the House's attention to a similar memorial on the Central Coast. The Gordy Wilson Bridge honours Senior Constable Peter "Gordy" Wilson, who served as part of the Brisbane Water Police District and lost his life in 2006 after being struck by a vehicle in Somersby while performing patrol duties. I was drawn to go back through Hansard to find the tribute to Senior Constable Wilson made by the former member for Gosford, Ms Marie Andrews, in 2010. She said:

On 17 November 2009 I represented the Minister for Police at a bridge naming ceremony dedicated to the memory of New South Wales Police Senior Constable Peter "Gordy" Wilson, who lost his life whilst on duty on 11 November 2006.

…

He had been performing radar checks on the F3 freeway north of the Somersby interchange. It is fitting that the bridge named in his honour is located … where Senior Constable Wilson lost his life.

These memorials demonstrate how much the deaths of our police officers in the line of duty affect our communities. I note that the NSW Police Honour Roll dates back to 26 August 1803, when Constable Joseph Luker of the Sydney Foot Police lost his life after being assaulted and stabbed. In 1862 the NSW Police Force was created by the amalgamation of existing police forces. The first three deaths recorded by the NSW Police Force on the honour roll are of Constable William Havilland, Senior Constable John Foy and Constable Jeremiah O'Horrigan, two of whom drowned crossing rivers. Of course, back in those days the job was very different. Constable William Havilland was killed whilst on a gold escort.

These are important memorials. They chronicle an important part of our history, but also honour and remember those men and women who have joined the Police Force to keep our citizens safe. People talk about heroes all the time. Our police run towards problems in difficult circumstances in order to keep the rest of us safe. The other day I was talking to a former serving member of the military about the memorial in The Domain. Vandals have scratched some quite disgusting words into it. He said to me, "It's absolutely disgusting and disgraceful that some low‑lives have vandalised the solemn place of remembrance." Just last year a man was charged after allegedly scratching "dogs" above the names of fallen officers and "evil" above the NSW Police emblem on the NSW Police Wall of Remembrance. In 2016 the wall was also vandalised with abusive messages. That does not pass the pub test—ask anyone. There is certainly no support for it in our community. No matter how angry people are, they should not desecrate such memorials. This legislation will bring it in line with those penalties for other memorials in the State. I commend the member for Barwon for introducing this very sensible bill. It should have great support, not just across the House but also across the whole community. I hope people will get the message and that no-one will has to be charged because they will not commit these heinous crimes of desecration in the future. I hope this sends the right message.

Mr BRENDAN MOYLAN ( Northern Tablelands ) ( 12:40 :26 ): Like all members who have spoken in the debate, I support the Summary Offences Amendment (Police Memorial Offences) Bill 2025. I thank the member for Barwon for bringing it. It is a commonsense bill, as are the amendments that the member for Lane Cove will move. The amendments are sensible and hopefully will be e supported by this House. It would be nice if we lived in a society where Parliament did not need to bring in bills like this one. It would be great if we lived in a society where memorials that should be sacrosanct were, indeed, treated with respect. Unfortunately, for reasons that none of us in this room understand, there are members of society who take it upon themselves to vandalise police memorials and, indeed, war memorials. It is important that as a Parliament we do what we can to deter that type of criminal activity. The bill certainly goes some way to doing that.

Police play such an important role in our communities, particularly in regional New South Wales. As the member for Orange said, our police go to work each day not knowing what they are going to face. Sometimes it will be a usual procedural day with nothing out of the ordinary. Other times it will be that one-in-a-thousand day when that they will be put in a life-threatening situation. They do an incredibly difficult job. Since becoming the member for Northern Tablelands, I have better insight into the difficulties that our police face on a daily basis. I have huge respect for my local police, as I think every local member does, particularly regional members. They play a crucial role in our communities. The least we can do is to show respect and have reverence for police memorials. While it is disappointing that we need this bill, it is a good and sensible bill. I commend the bill to the House.

Ms JANELLE SAFFIN ( Lismore—Minister for Small Business, Minister for Recovery, and Minister for the North Coast) (12:42:44): I speak in support of the Summary Offences Amendment (Police Memorial Offences) Bill 2025 brought before this place by my parliamentary colleague the member for Barwon. It is a tribute to him that he has garnered the support of Government, Opposition and Independent members. As the member for Northern Tablelands just talked about, it is a bill we can rally around, particularly those of us from regional areas who work very closely with our police. I am sure members in the city do that too, but I know the regions extremely well. I have three police districts in my electorate. I have three police superintendents and they cover a large area, which is often the case in regional areas.

We work closely with police and see the things that they do each and every day to make the public and the community safe. We also see the dangers that they face, which are inherent in the job. I say thank you to them. The police website has an honour role of remembrance that records each police officer who has died in a duty‑related death. Looking through it made me reflect. It lists the first officer to die as Constable Joseph Luker, on 26 August 1803, who was part of the Sydney Foot Police and was assaulted and stabbed by offenders. The roll shows just how many police have died in service, and that is why memorials are so important to the communities that have established them in their local area. I have in one in Lismore. Some time ago, I was asked to support cleaning it up and keeping it in good repair. Ken Arnett, who is the president of the RSL and of the Rotary Club of Summerland Sunrise, organised that memorial as a place we can go to honour our police who have paid the ultimate price in service.

The bill puts beyond doubt that the offence in section 8 (2) of the Summary Offences Act of wilfully damaging or defacing any protected place captures police memorials. Of course, it could be argued that they are captured, but this puts it beyond doubt. It serves as a beacon that this place is saying that we consider this to be similarly important. It has an educative effect, as well. That is why the Government and I am happy to support the bill. Currently, section 8 of the Act includes two offences. The first is under section 8 (2) of wilfully damaging or defacing any protected place, which carries a maximum penalty of 40 penalty units, which is $4,400. A protected place is defined in section 8 (1) as a shrine, monument or statue located in a public place and, without limitation, includes a war memorial or an interment site.

The second offence is in section 8 (3), which provides that committing any nuisance or any offensive or indecent act in, on or in connection with any war memorial or interment site carries a maximum penalty of 20 penalty units. Section 8 (3A) provides that, as an alternative to a fine to these offences, the courts may impose a community correction order, with the standard conditions, and a community service work condition, or the equivalent order for children. It is taken quite seriously. The law says that. Section 8 (3B) provides that if a person is convicted of an offence under section 8 in relation to a war memorial, a compensation order is also available to the sentencing court. As I said, it is likely that police memorials are already captured, but the member for Barwon rightfully put it before the Parliament to say, Let us put it beyond doubt so there can be no doubt when these issues come before the court." The bill will make sure that police memorials are captured in the Summary Offences Act. I commend the bill to the House.

Mr MICHAEL KEMP ( Oxley ) ( 12:48 :06 ): The Summary Offences Amendment (Police Memorial Offences) Bill 2025 is about respect and recognition of those who put themselves in harm's way to protect our communities. The bill is about protecting sacred places, including police memorials that stand as symbols of courage, of sacrifice and of service. Australians cherish our freedom—the freedom of speech, the freedom of movement and the democratic way of life that we all enjoy. Those freedoms have been preserved through service, whether on battlefields abroad or on the streets of our towns and cities. Too often, the price paid for these freedoms and our way of life is the ultimate one—the loss of life—or a long, quiet battle with mental health.

In this State we recognise war memorials as sacred spaces. This bill is a necessary step in recognising that police memorials also deserve the same legal protection and respect. Police officers put their hands up to serve. They are asked to confront situations that are dangerous, unpredictable and unknown. The actions required in those moments are difficult to predict. No-one knows how they will react to an unknown situation until they experience it. The courage and composure demanded is extraordinary. Yet, despite all of that, they are sometimes criticised unfairly. Or worse, they are disrespected in their own towns.

Lately, our State has been in heated debate about policing, about methods used in crowd control and the actions of officers when they interact with the public. These conversations are important. When there are real concerns about actions or behaviours, they should be addressed. It should also be noted that such actions or behaviours are very rare. We must remember that policing is an occupation that very few can nominate themselves to do. Not many walk into volatile, unknown situations each day. Not many put their families aside so that ours can sleep safely.

In the current political climate, it is crucial to recognise the demands placed on police officers. In my electorate, our police are stretched thin. They have a large territory to cover. They go to work every day knowing full well they may confront danger, trauma or worse. It is a tough job to cover such a large area without support. It is a demanding job, and it is a role that deserves our respect. When tragedy does strike, we feel the loss deeply, not only in New South Wales but right around Australia. It is unimaginable. Families lose a mother, a father, a son, a daughter or a friend, all for the safety of the community and for the protection of the State. We all care deeply, because we know the cost of their service is profound.

I think of the recent deaths of Detective Leading Senior Constable Neal Thompson and Senior Constable Vadim de Waart, who were tragically killed while executing a warrant against a sovereign citizen in Victoria. Their deaths remind us of the real dangers our officers face each day, and the ultimate sacrifice some officers pay in the line of duty. On that day, they faced unexpected gunfire. Their sacrifice cannot be overstated. We also know the bravery shown during the Bondi terror attack, where a senior detective confronted an armed attacker, sacrificing his own safety to protect the public. Two officers were seriously injured in the line of duty, including Constable Scott Dyson, who endured grave injuries and has since begun his recovery. It could have been much worse. Those officers courageously put themselves on the front line, and we must thank them. Officers on the front line take a chance every day, facing unexpected conditions that may pose a risk their safety. When someone takes on the blue uniform, that risk is a constant.

This bill makes clear that police memorials should be protected places under law, just as war memorials are. It ensures that wilful damage, indecent behaviour or offensive acts in those places come with strict consequences. There must be retribution for anyone who chooses to disrespect those sacred sites. Stricter fines and penalties are not just symbolic; they are a deterrent. They send a clear message that this behaviour is unacceptable and will not be tolerated. The actions that desecrate memorials show a lack of understanding and a lack of regard for the sacrifices others have made for our safety and freedoms. Those who desecrate memorials based on ideology are the first people to put their hands up for police protection when they need it.

We also have a responsibility as a community to educate Australians about respect and to lead a life that is law abiding. This bill goes some way in recognising the service of police officers and showing that to disrespect those sacred places is to disrespect the sacrifice and courage of the officers we rely on every day. It is commonsense legislation. I acknowledge the member for Barwon, who brought this bill before the House. It has received wideranging support, as it should. This bill protects the memory of brave officers who showed up to reinforce community values and make sure the community is safe. I commend the bill to the House.

Mr GREG WARREN ( Campbelltown ) ( 12:54 :15 ): I am delighted to contribute to debate on the Summary Offences Amendment (Police Memorial Offences) Bill 2025. I acknowledge my friend, the very hardworking member for Barwon, Mr Roy Butler, and thank him for bringing this bill before the House. It is another example of his commitment to ensure that adequate provisions are in place to protect memorials and acknowledge those who serve our community. Before I go into the bill in more detail, with the House's indulgence, I would like to begin by talking about the most important thing: the contribution and sacrifice made by our police officers in each and every community.

I was just talking to another good friend and former police officer, the member for Orange, who served for a considerable amount of time in my electorate of Campbelltown. It is 25 years this year since Senior Constable James "Jim" Affleck was killed on the Hume Highway when throwing spikes out across the road. There is a memorial to Jim at Campbelltown Police Station. Every year, the close-knit police community in our local area command gather there to remember him. I did not know Jim personally—I was driving coal trucks at the time—but I remember that incident and how it shook the community.

That incident reminded us of the dangers that police officers face, whether they are a detective, a probationary constable on general duty, a highway patrol officer or an officer working at the front desk. I know about the dangers that police officers confront, because I am very fortunate to share a close and well‑supported relationship with my local area commander, Grant Healey. He keeps me well-informed about matters that need to be raised or addressed. I am very fortunate to enjoy a relationship that allows me to consult with Mr Healey to have matters resolved before they accelerate and get worse.

Drawing on recent events, particularly at Bondi, we saw our police officers step up. Mr Healey told me of police officers who were ending their shifts who, when they heard what was evolving at Bondi, flocked to support their colleagues on the ground and protect that community. I was deeply disappointed at the emergence of contrary, inconsistent and unfair questioning about the level of police presence. I commend the Premier and the Minister for Police and Counter-terrorism, as well as the member for Vaucluse, for correcting the record at the time. At a difficult time, they stood up to defend and protect our police, just as our police protect and defend us. That is only right and trust. It is also right and just that this bill is before the House in order to defend and protect memorials that do not celebrate but remember and honour the sacrifice and commitment of our police officers, particularly those who have made the ultimate sacrifice as they marched that thin blue line. It is not an easy job.

The Government supports this bill. Its purpose is to amend the Summary Offences Act 1988. Firstly, it puts beyond doubt that the offence of wilfully damaging or defacing any protected place in section 8 (2) captures police memorials, by amending the definition of "protected place" in section 8 (1) to expressly include police memorials. Secondly, it expands the offence of committing a nuisance or any offensive or indecent act in, on, or in connection with any war memorial or interment site in section 8 (3) so it also captures police memorials. While that is necessary, it is sad that we need to introduce this type of legislation. Why? It is because deficient human beings of an undesirable nature will take it upon themselves—for what reason I will never understand—to damage those memorials.

Like the many other veterans in this place and elsewhere who have served throughout our great country and our State, I find it heartbreaking to visit war memorials. That is not because they concern us personally but because they are places to go to remember those who served, particularly for those of us who lost friends during our service. Police memorials are not dissimilar to that. They are special places where families and especially police officers can visit to remember officers who, like themselves and their loved ones, served on the front line of the community to keep us safe. That is so very important. That brings me to the point of why the bill is required.

Currently, section 8 of the Summary Offences Act includes two offences. Section 8 (2) provides that wilfully damaging or defacing any protected place carries a maximum penalty of 40 penalty units. A protected place is defined in section 8 (1) as "a shrine, monument or statue located in a public place, and (without limitation) includes a war memorial or an interment site". Section 8 (3) provides:

A person must not commit any nuisance or any offensive or indecent act in, on or in connection with any war memorial or interment site.

It carries a maximum penalty of 20 penalty units. As an alternative to a fine for those offences, section 8 (3A) provides that the court may impose a community corrections order with the standard conditions and a community service work condition, or the equivalent order for children. If a person is convicted of an offence under section 8 in relation to a war memorial, a compensation order is also available to the sentencing court under section 8 (3B). Although it is likely that police memorials are already captured by the offence of wilfully damaging or defacing a protected place in section 8 (2) of the Summary Offences Act—as monuments fall under the definition of "protected place"—putting that beyond doubt will enhance understanding of the offences and their application to police memorials. That amendment will also serve an important symbolic role by signalling the seriousness of that conduct, and it will be a way to show respect to the police officers who lost their lives as part of their service.

Furthermore, the bill makes clear that each and every member of this Parliament will not tolerate such conduct. It puts it beyond reasonable doubt. The mind-numbing morons who take it upon themselves to wilfully and deliberately damage those memorials should be in no doubt that the law will come for them and come down very hard, and that is the primary motive of the member for Barwon in bringing the bill before the House. To conclude, if it is good enough for the State to look to our local police officers to serve, protect and respect the law and order of our communities, and to keep us all safe, it is just as good for this Parliament to serve and respect each and every one of them.

Ms CHARISHMA KALIYANDA ( Liver pool ) ( 13:07 :46 ): I support the Summary Offences Amendment (Police Memorial Offences) Bill 2025, introduced by the member for Barwon. The bill represents an important step in recognising and protecting the solemn sites dedicated to police officers who have given their lives in service to our community. I acknowledge the contributions to debate of many of my fellow members in this place who have shared deeply moving stories of the myriad contributions police officers have made—tragically, at the cost of their lives—across their communities. It is only proper that those officers are remembered and that their legacies continue to be shared with the communities they protected with their lives.

I state at the outset that the Government supports the bill. The purpose of the bill is straightforward. It seeks to amend the Summary Offences Act 1988 to make it clear beyond doubt that police memorials are protected places. It does so by explicitly including police memorials in the definition of a protected place, ensuring that wilfully damaging or defacing them is a clear offence. Furthermore, the bill extends the offence of committing a nuisance, or any offensive or indecent act, to apply to police memorials in the same way as already applies to war memorials and interment sites.

Currently, section 8 of the Summary Offences Act contains two key offences: first, wilfully damaging or defacing a protected place, which carries a maximum penalty of 40 penalty units; and second, committing a nuisance, or any offensive or indecent act, in connection with a war memorial or interment site, which carries a maximum penalty of 20 penalty units. Courts also have the discretion to impose community correction orders, community service or, in certain cases, discretionary compensation orders. While it is likely that police memorials are already captured under the definition of "protected place", the bill removes any ambiguity. This is not merely a technical amendment; it is a symbolic one. The bill sends a clear message that the broader community values the service and sacrifice of police officers, and that any act of disrespect against these memorials will not be tolerated.

There is a clear policy rationale for this bill. Police memorials, like war memorials, serve as solemn sites for reflection, remembrance and respect. Acts of nuisance or offensive and indecent behaviour at these sites cause real harm to families, colleagues and the broader community. By extending those protections, we ensure that police memorials are afforded the same respect and legal safeguards as other significant sites of public remembrance. The need for this protection is evident. In January 2025 a man was charged after allegedly scratching words such as "dogs" and "evil" into the NSW Police Wall of Remembrance in Sydney directly above the names of officers who had lost their lives in the line of duty. Sadly, this was not an isolated incident. In 2016 the wall of remembrance was also vandalised with scratches and abusive messages. Those incidents demonstrate that police memorials remain vulnerable to acts of disrespect. The NSW Police Force has rightly been consulted on the bill and fully supports these amendments. This support reflects the widespread recognition of the importance of safeguarding the dignity of police memorials.

The bill also builds on the Government's recent legislative reforms to protect war memorials. Earlier this year, the Crimes Legislation Amendment (War Memorial Offences) Bill 2025 introduced aggravated property damage offences where the property is a war memorial and provided for discretionary compensation orders. Extending those protections to police memorials ensures consistency in our legal framework and fairness in how we recognise and protect sites of public remembrance, especially as those who are remembered and respected in both war memorials and police memorials have protected the community at large at the cost of their lives. This bill is about more than offences or penalties. It is about respect, it is about remembrance and it is about honouring those who have made the ultimate sacrifice in service to our community. It is also about sending a clear and unambiguous message that acts of vandalism, indecency or nuisance at sites of public remembrance are unacceptable.

Furthermore, the Government is currently attempting to rebuild the capacity of the NSW Police Force. After years of falling recruitment numbers, in December 2025 the largest ever cohort of recruits was welcomed— and an even larger cohort will be welcomed in a few short weeks. This bill demonstrates to new recruits that the work they do and the sacrifices they make, not just at the cost of their lives but also other elements of sacrifice, are respected and not taken lightly by the broader community. I commend the member for Barwon for introducing the bill and the Government for its support, which will ensure that respect and appreciation for the Police Force is conveyed. I urge all members to support this important legislation, which will protect the dignity of police memorials and honour the service and sacrifice of those who dedicate their lives to keeping our community safe. I commend the bill to the House.

Mrs SALLY QUINNELL ( Camden ) ( 13:14 :05 ): I make a brief contribution to debate on the Summary Offences Amendment (Police Memorial Offences) Bill 2025. I thank the member for Barwon for introducing this incredible amending bill and for initiating a vital conversation about the importance of memorials. They are places where we can come together to honour those who have lost their lives, particularly those who die while doing their job and making our spaces safer and ensuring that we feel we can go about our daily lives without worrying about our safety and what is around the corner or to have looking after ourselves at front of mind. We do not want a society in this State where we base our decisions entirely on our own safety. Because of the work that our police do day in, day out—most of it incredibly quietly and diligently—we do not have to worry in that way.

There is only one police area command in my electorate of Camden, centred at the new police station that was opened by the former Government and former Commissioner Andrew Scipione in 2011. This custom‑built building was designed for the police, by the police. We see, honour and respect what police do every day, but when things go poorly and not to plan, we must also honour their sacrifice. The member for Liverpool mentioned the other types of sacrifice that police make. There is of course the ultimate sacrifice, but there is also the sacrifice of injury—whether temporary or permanent, physical or psychological—as well as the sacrifice of family and friends when an officer chooses to work a shift on Christmas Day or on other days of family, religious or community significance to ensure the safety and general smooth running of their community.

These memorials are places for family and friends to honour and remember those officers who would have turned up to work to make what they thought on the day was a small sacrifice but made the ultimate sacrifice of losing their lives. They are forever a focus of remembrance and grief and a place of gathering. They leave a legacy of remembrance and are a place to bring thoughts. Countless studies have been done on the importance of memorials in the grieving process, helping family, friends and colleagues to come together and remember, honour and joke about the person who has passed. To even consider defacing, marking or doing anything to these memorials apart from honouring them is mind blowing to me. I do not understand it, and possibly it comes from another place of pain, but we need to make it perfectly clear to everybody in the community that it is not on. It is not acceptable to go to any memorial or interment and to deface or mark the memorial in a way that does not honour the person or persons commemorated.

It is important to talk about the importance of what our police do. I am very lucky to come from an area of New South Wales that has relatively low crime. But it is not a fluke. No-one has waved pixie dust over Camden, suddenly making it an incredibly safe area. It is because of the work that police do behind the scenes all day, every day. That work includes going into schools and forming relationships with children at risk and having conversations with students about how to gather safely and unthreateningly—how to gather in groups at parks and shopping centres and remain within the parameters of the law. They talk to teens about road safety. They talk about the importance of sticking to speed limits and knowing the road rules, even when cycling and using footpaths or sharing the road with cars. They visit aged-care facilities and talk to seniors about cybersecurity, which is incredibly important and provokes deep fear in older people in my community.

They pair up with Bunnings and have breakfast while interacting with tradies, who get a free breakfast because they have spoken to a cop. They have conversations about construction safety and theft, which—I will be honest—is a bit of a problem out my way. Having those conversations means that those relationships are already there, so if someone is having their worst day, they already have a relationship with Narellan police. That means when they need to speak to the constable at the counter, they know that the conversation will be calm and respectful, and they will be heard. That preventative work makes a huge difference in my area to having a strong relationship with police. I have to mention that Narellan Police Station has the world's most successful open day. Because we are under the training flight path for PolAir, we get a visit from PolAir every year at our open day, and it is a huge success. That enables children to understand that the police are there to help them. It is incredibly important that we support our police, and that they know we respect them not only every day but also at the absolute worst moments, such as when they have lost one of their colleagues or a family member or a friend.

It is important that we protect the memorials that they hold very dear and make sure they are looked after. I thank the member for Barwon for bringing the bill to the Chamber because it is extremely important that we expand the definition of "protected place" so there is no need to assume what it includes. The bill will now state publicly that it includes a war memorial, a police memorial or an interment site. This puts it beyond any doubt that police memorials are included in the protected place status and all the penalties that have been spoken about by my learned colleagues apply to police memorials as well as war memorials. I thank the member for bringing this important legislation to the Chamber. Along with other members of the Government, I also commend the bill to the House.

Ms LYNDA VOLTZ ( Auburn ) ( 13:24 :19 ): Like many in the Chamber, I also support the Summary Offences Amendment (Police Memorial Offences) Bill 2025, which was introduced by Mr Roy Butler. The bill amends the Summary Offences Act to insert a definition of a police memorial in section 8 (1) as:

… a memorial, erected in a public place by or on behalf of a local council or an authority of the State or another jurisdiction, to police officers.

It also expands the definition of a protected place in section 8 (1) to explicitly capture police memorials by adding the text, "protected place means a shrine, monument or statue located in a public place, and (without limitation) includes a war memorial, a police memorial or an interment site". This puts beyond doubt that the offence of wilfully damaging or defacing any protected place in section 8 (2) captures police memorials. It is right that we put that beyond doubt, and that is exactly what the member opposite has done.

Further, there is a clear policy justification for extending the offence of committing a nuisance, offensive act or indecent act in, on or in connection with any war memorial or interment site in section 8 (3) of the Summary Offences Act to also capture police memorials. As members know, war memorials and police memorials serve a similar purpose as solemn sites for reflection, remembrance and paying respect for sacrifices made. Those sacrifices have been significant. Anyone who thinks that the job of a police officer is an easy one has not looked into what police do. Every day police are on our streets dealing with some of the worst people in society and some of the most horrific scenes we could possibly imagine. They are under tremendous stress. Police have a roll of honour located in the Domain and a ceremony is held there every year. If one looks at the names on it, one of the things that will stick out is how many police have died by suicide resulting from their duties.

We cannot comprehend the unbelievable stress faced by police. They turn up to motor vehicle accidents every day. They see the carnage that is created when bodies of men, women and children are strewn across a crash site. After they have picked up a whole family off the road, they then see some idiot driving at 140 kilometres. The impact on the mental health of police officers is extraordinary. I know the Minister for Roads shares my concerns about the behaviour of some drivers because at the end of the day the people who are picking up the pieces are our frontline services, including police officers. The toll is borne by the families of police officers whose names are added to the roll because they died by suicide as a result of their duties. Those police officers spent their lives trying to make other people safe, and it is a very difficult job. Although 98 per cent of people do the right thing, unfortunately the police have to deal with the 2 per cent of people that make things difficult for society and are the mainstay for police.

The police whose names are added to memorials are heroic. The last two names are Sergeant Peter Thomas Stone, added in 2023; and Senior Constable Kelly Foster, added in 2021. Both Senior Constable Foster and Sergeant Stone drowned attempting to save the lives of others. We expect nothing less from our police officers than that heroic nature. They show it every day. They were the people there on the spot and they were the ones who went in to help, because they were police officers and they regarded that as part of their duties. They paid the ultimate price for that. Police face violence every day. It is a very difficult job. They are dealing with some of the most violent people you could possibly imagine.

In 2010 Detective Constable William Arthur George Crews was shot during the execution of a search warrant in Bankstown. No-one expects to turn up to their job, execute a search warrant on behalf of the people of New South Wales and be shot by someone who has pulled a gun on them. Another police officer then had to explain to the Detective Constable's wife and children why he was not coming home that day. Likewise, in 2012 Senior Constable David James Rixon was shot while conducting a traffic stop in Tamworth. The horrendous nature of what happened to those police officers should be seared into the memory of every person in the State. Police officers do their job on our behalf and are likely to face violence and aggression every time they implement the laws of this Parliament. In this State, it is rare to allow people to use force on our behalf because it places those people at risk. Memorials are a reminder of the duty that police perform on behalf of the people of New South Wales. They are a constant reminder of what we have asked police to do. That is hugely important.

Many people in my diverse electorate have a mixed idea about police. Quite often, they arrive from countries where there has been civil war, non-functioning governments and police unlike our police, who operate within a democratic system with essential oversight and act on behalf of the community to make it safer. Those members of my community have difficulty understanding or adjusting to the fact that the police will always be there to help them. These memorials remind those constituents that the Police Force—which has been here since the colonial settlement—is there to act on behalf of the people. Since self-government, that is what this Parliament has always required them to do.

I commend the member for Barwon for bringing the bill before the House. It is essential to make sure that there is no misunderstanding about what is and is not covered by an Act. Unequivocally, this bill ensures that everybody understands that the NSW Police Force—they are a force, just like our armed services—has memorials, and that, as with war memorials, police memorials in New South Wales must be protected from any kind of denigration. That is not just because it is the right thing to do, but also because it is important to the memory of the families and children, mothers and fathers, brothers and sisters who sent their family members out to act on our behalf. It is important that their memory is protected.

Dr DAVID SALIBA ( Fairfield ) ( 13:32 :59 ): I speak in support of the Summary Offences Amendment (Police Memorial Offences) Bill 2025. I commend the member for Barwon for his work in this legislative space, and for his work during this term of Parliament. I have seen him work extremely hard supporting his community and it is great to see him support police across the State by introducing this bill. I have listened for an hour and a half to other contributors speaking extensively about the bill and sharing their views on the impact of memorials on the wellbeing of police. The bill removes the ambiguity of the application of the Summary Offences Act relating to the wilful damage or defacing of police memorials. It includes that definitional aspect and also captures any nuisance or offensive and indecent act perpetrated on police memorials as well as war memorials.

Many contributors spoke about the need for the bill and the importance of police in our society. The primary role of government is to protect citizens—that is front and centre. Our police are at the coalface, on the front line, doing just that. They do amazing work despite the circumstances that exist within a highly complex environment and staffing constraints. Despite the increasing workload, the complex nature of the job, the structural difficulties that this Government has faced in terms of recruitment and retention—which it has responded to with extensive policies—the police have gone above and beyond to serve society. That is particularly applicable in Fairfield and Cabramatta. I see the work performed there and give shout-out to those police officers. I deal with them quite regularly. I consider them my friends. When I am in Fairfield, I swing past the police station to say hi and thank them for the work that they do.

The struggles of the job are quite extensive. I was a Federal Police officer. My job was pretty cool and I got to do great things. However, general duties policing has an extensive rostering system requiring officers to work night shifts. They deal with issues such as domestic violence. From a danger perspective, what they deal with is quite confronting. Federal Police are able to risk‑assess what they do, but general duties police may be confronted by unknown situations. Sometimes just one officer has to deal with someone who turns out to be quite dangerous. I commend them. They risk getting abused and physically injured through the use of force.

The member for Auburn spoke about officers facing gunfire, physical violence, brawls and assaults in the execution of their duties. With physical harm also comes the mental anguish that police officers face. PTSD is massive in police because they deal with quite confronting situations. Even if the dangers posed by the job are removed, police still witness loss of life in a car accident or turn up to a house and see a deceased person. Over time, that has an impact. I have spoken before about my time with the joint counterterrorism team. As a young agent, I worked with and learnt from a senior police sergeant who had extensive experience. He explained that different people have a different size cup or bucket, and when you confront something traumatic, it fills and fills and eventually overloads. Police have to contend with that.

In addition, police feel disconnected from family due to shift work. Contributors to the debate also spoke about police deaths. I acknowledge on-duty and off-duty deaths of police. In 1997 Constable David Carty lost his life to a gang, which found him one night when he was off duty and he lost his life. He is still remembered. Next year marks the 30-year anniversary of his passing. People still think about that incident. That is what a memorial is about: remembering our fallen officers. Suicides also happen quite extensively in service and post-service. That is no doubt linked to the job as well.

In terms of memorials, it is important for society to recognise and understand the work that police officers do, for colleagues to commemorate their mates, and for families and friends to have a place to remember their fallen loved ones. When I was with the Federal Police, I went to the colleges in Canberra and participated in National Police Memorial Day. They took us to the national memorial where—correct me if I am wrong; it was many years ago—we saw how many police lives were lost over 100 years. In fact, I was quite shocked to see how many officers had lost their lives—not just sworn but also unsworn officers. I remember Curtis Cheng in Parramatta, who was just doing his job, and the terror incident in 2015. He was an unsworn officer. The bill makes sense. It is logical. Do not deface or do anything offensive to a memorial site. We all know that is highly offensive and it should be criminalised. The ambiguity should be removed. By virtue of that, I commend the bill to the House.