South Australia vows to crack down on street gangs, expanding police powers
The South Australian government has vowed to crack down on street gangs by introducing 'tough new measures' that give police greater powers and prevent further recruits to the crime rings.
The proposed new laws will expand current police powers, giving them the authority to treat street gangs in a similar way to outlaw motorcycle gangs.
Further changes would include creating a new offence making it illegal for people to recruit members to a street gang, as well as ensuring courts can impose conditions on street gang participants, such as preventing them from possessing certain weapons and associating with certain individuals and attending certain locations.
Other changes would allow the police commissioner to apply to the court for control orders to restrict certain activities for street gang members and participants, and allow for identified criminal groups to be declared as street gangs by regulation.
'These reforms are all about cracking down on street gangs by giving police greater powers, similar to what they have for outlaw motorcycle gangs, to keep the South Australian community safe,' South Australia Attorney-General Kyam Maher said.
'These proposed new laws have been developed in close consultation with SAPOL and are designed to give them appropriate legislative tools to tackle these criminal groups.'
'This government is continuing to deliver on policies that are tough on crime, protect the community and support our law enforcement agencies,' he said.
'This comes on the back of this year's state budget investment that will help our law enforcement agencies in bringing offenders to account, and securing justice for victims of crime.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News AU
15 hours ago
- Sky News AU
AFL 2025: Treatment of Adelaide Crows' Taylor Walker called out
Adelaide coach Matthew Nicks has called out the 'unfair' treatment of veteran forward Taylor Walker after he was caught up in unsubstantiated claims alleging St Kilda's Nasiah Wanganeen-Milera had ruled out moving to the club due to a historical racism incident. Reports early in the week suggested Wanganeen-Milera, who is off contract at the Saints and being courted by both South Australian clubs, had ruled out the Crows because of Walker's indiscretion in 2021. The former Adelaide captain was given a six-match ban and a $20,000 sanction after being overheard making a racist comment at a SANFL match. But both Wanganeen-Milera's manager and the player vehemently denied the report, with Walker also reaching out to seek clarification, which was given to him. In the wake of the fallout, Nicks said he was proud of how Walker handled the situation, his growth since the 2021 incident, and lashed the way it was played out, calling out a 'lack of accountability' in contract speculation. 'I didn't like the way it played out at all. I think it was unfair to a lot of people,' Nicks said. 'But no, I didn't get any more involved than checking in with Taylor, for example, to make sure he knows I'm proud of what he's done since an unacceptable moment four years ago. 'He's done a lot of work on educating himself, probably more than anyone at the footy club. But our whole footy club has improved off the back of that (incident). 'I'd prefer not to talk further on it because it's not something I've got involved in, other than touching base with one or two people.' Nicks wouldn't be drawn on whether the club was chasing Wanganeen-Milera, who could be in line for a seven-figure payday for his new deal. 'We don't talk about players from other footy clubs,' Nicks said. 'It's something we've shown a lot of respect around over the years. It's just not a space we go into.' But Nicks conceded talk around contracts was hard to avoid and 'part of the deal' for players. Originally published as Taylor Walker has full support of Adelaide coach Matthew Nicks after being singled out over historical racism incident
The Advertiser
18 hours ago
- The Advertiser
'Least curious and least informed': what is AUKUS and why does it matter?
A US review of the contentious AUKUS deal has revived public debate in Australia about how our nation got involved and what we're expected to get out of it - at what cost. AUKUS is a three-nation security pact between Australia, the US and the UK, brokered in 2021 when Scott Morrison was prime minister. Mr Morrison controversially dumped a deal with France to supply diesel-powered submarines in favour of the partnership which is designed to deliver nuclear-powered submarines instead. Pulling out of that deal ultimately cost Australian taxpayers about $3.4 billion and strained diplomatic relations with France. AUKUS is widely seen as response to China's strategic moves and growing influence in the Pacific. Under the partnership, Australia is set to acquire three Virginia-class submarines from the US in the early 2030s before a new fleet of boats is built for delivery from the 2040s. But the US is lagging in production of the boats, and the American president can sink the deal if his navy's capabilities are at risk, which is why the review flagged by the Pentagon has some people worried. It's estimated AUKUS will cost Australia about $368 billion and ultimately deliver at least eight nuclear-powered submarines, some of which would come from the US. In February, Australia made the first of six $800 million payments to the US under the deal. The UK recently completed a review of its involvement in AUKUS review and reiterated its support. Critics of AUKUS point to the lagging production of boats in the US and have warned the deal might jeopardise the US navy's capabilities. The US is also pressuring Australia to raise its defence spending to 3.5 per cent of gross domestic product, while President Donald Trump wants to double tariffs on imported steel from 25 per cent to 50 per cent. Former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull took to social media on June 12 to declare America's AUKUS review was a "wake up call". "But Australia, which has the most at stake, has no review. Our parliament to date has been the least curious and least informed," he wrote on X. "Time to wake up?" Former South Australian independent senator and transparency warrior Rex Patrick said it was time to "pull the plug" on AUKUS. "The program is an unaffordable, sovereign sapping and highly risky defence acquisition - a huge blunder of [Scott Morrison], embraced by [Prime Minister Anthony Albanese]," he wrote, also on X. "Trump will likely demand more $ billions, or else exit. We should pull the plug." Australia's defence minister, Richard Marles, played down the US review, saying it was "natural" the Trump administration would want to re-examine the partnership, which was forged under the leadership of former president Joe Biden. A US review of the contentious AUKUS deal has revived public debate in Australia about how our nation got involved and what we're expected to get out of it - at what cost. AUKUS is a three-nation security pact between Australia, the US and the UK, brokered in 2021 when Scott Morrison was prime minister. Mr Morrison controversially dumped a deal with France to supply diesel-powered submarines in favour of the partnership which is designed to deliver nuclear-powered submarines instead. Pulling out of that deal ultimately cost Australian taxpayers about $3.4 billion and strained diplomatic relations with France. AUKUS is widely seen as response to China's strategic moves and growing influence in the Pacific. Under the partnership, Australia is set to acquire three Virginia-class submarines from the US in the early 2030s before a new fleet of boats is built for delivery from the 2040s. But the US is lagging in production of the boats, and the American president can sink the deal if his navy's capabilities are at risk, which is why the review flagged by the Pentagon has some people worried. It's estimated AUKUS will cost Australia about $368 billion and ultimately deliver at least eight nuclear-powered submarines, some of which would come from the US. In February, Australia made the first of six $800 million payments to the US under the deal. The UK recently completed a review of its involvement in AUKUS review and reiterated its support. Critics of AUKUS point to the lagging production of boats in the US and have warned the deal might jeopardise the US navy's capabilities. The US is also pressuring Australia to raise its defence spending to 3.5 per cent of gross domestic product, while President Donald Trump wants to double tariffs on imported steel from 25 per cent to 50 per cent. Former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull took to social media on June 12 to declare America's AUKUS review was a "wake up call". "But Australia, which has the most at stake, has no review. Our parliament to date has been the least curious and least informed," he wrote on X. "Time to wake up?" Former South Australian independent senator and transparency warrior Rex Patrick said it was time to "pull the plug" on AUKUS. "The program is an unaffordable, sovereign sapping and highly risky defence acquisition - a huge blunder of [Scott Morrison], embraced by [Prime Minister Anthony Albanese]," he wrote, also on X. "Trump will likely demand more $ billions, or else exit. We should pull the plug." Australia's defence minister, Richard Marles, played down the US review, saying it was "natural" the Trump administration would want to re-examine the partnership, which was forged under the leadership of former president Joe Biden. A US review of the contentious AUKUS deal has revived public debate in Australia about how our nation got involved and what we're expected to get out of it - at what cost. AUKUS is a three-nation security pact between Australia, the US and the UK, brokered in 2021 when Scott Morrison was prime minister. Mr Morrison controversially dumped a deal with France to supply diesel-powered submarines in favour of the partnership which is designed to deliver nuclear-powered submarines instead. Pulling out of that deal ultimately cost Australian taxpayers about $3.4 billion and strained diplomatic relations with France. AUKUS is widely seen as response to China's strategic moves and growing influence in the Pacific. Under the partnership, Australia is set to acquire three Virginia-class submarines from the US in the early 2030s before a new fleet of boats is built for delivery from the 2040s. But the US is lagging in production of the boats, and the American president can sink the deal if his navy's capabilities are at risk, which is why the review flagged by the Pentagon has some people worried. It's estimated AUKUS will cost Australia about $368 billion and ultimately deliver at least eight nuclear-powered submarines, some of which would come from the US. In February, Australia made the first of six $800 million payments to the US under the deal. The UK recently completed a review of its involvement in AUKUS review and reiterated its support. Critics of AUKUS point to the lagging production of boats in the US and have warned the deal might jeopardise the US navy's capabilities. The US is also pressuring Australia to raise its defence spending to 3.5 per cent of gross domestic product, while President Donald Trump wants to double tariffs on imported steel from 25 per cent to 50 per cent. Former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull took to social media on June 12 to declare America's AUKUS review was a "wake up call". "But Australia, which has the most at stake, has no review. Our parliament to date has been the least curious and least informed," he wrote on X. "Time to wake up?" Former South Australian independent senator and transparency warrior Rex Patrick said it was time to "pull the plug" on AUKUS. "The program is an unaffordable, sovereign sapping and highly risky defence acquisition - a huge blunder of [Scott Morrison], embraced by [Prime Minister Anthony Albanese]," he wrote, also on X. "Trump will likely demand more $ billions, or else exit. We should pull the plug." Australia's defence minister, Richard Marles, played down the US review, saying it was "natural" the Trump administration would want to re-examine the partnership, which was forged under the leadership of former president Joe Biden. A US review of the contentious AUKUS deal has revived public debate in Australia about how our nation got involved and what we're expected to get out of it - at what cost. AUKUS is a three-nation security pact between Australia, the US and the UK, brokered in 2021 when Scott Morrison was prime minister. Mr Morrison controversially dumped a deal with France to supply diesel-powered submarines in favour of the partnership which is designed to deliver nuclear-powered submarines instead. Pulling out of that deal ultimately cost Australian taxpayers about $3.4 billion and strained diplomatic relations with France. AUKUS is widely seen as response to China's strategic moves and growing influence in the Pacific. Under the partnership, Australia is set to acquire three Virginia-class submarines from the US in the early 2030s before a new fleet of boats is built for delivery from the 2040s. But the US is lagging in production of the boats, and the American president can sink the deal if his navy's capabilities are at risk, which is why the review flagged by the Pentagon has some people worried. It's estimated AUKUS will cost Australia about $368 billion and ultimately deliver at least eight nuclear-powered submarines, some of which would come from the US. In February, Australia made the first of six $800 million payments to the US under the deal. The UK recently completed a review of its involvement in AUKUS review and reiterated its support. Critics of AUKUS point to the lagging production of boats in the US and have warned the deal might jeopardise the US navy's capabilities. The US is also pressuring Australia to raise its defence spending to 3.5 per cent of gross domestic product, while President Donald Trump wants to double tariffs on imported steel from 25 per cent to 50 per cent. Former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull took to social media on June 12 to declare America's AUKUS review was a "wake up call". "But Australia, which has the most at stake, has no review. Our parliament to date has been the least curious and least informed," he wrote on X. "Time to wake up?" Former South Australian independent senator and transparency warrior Rex Patrick said it was time to "pull the plug" on AUKUS. "The program is an unaffordable, sovereign sapping and highly risky defence acquisition - a huge blunder of [Scott Morrison], embraced by [Prime Minister Anthony Albanese]," he wrote, also on X. "Trump will likely demand more $ billions, or else exit. We should pull the plug." Australia's defence minister, Richard Marles, played down the US review, saying it was "natural" the Trump administration would want to re-examine the partnership, which was forged under the leadership of former president Joe Biden.
7NEWS
2 days ago
- 7NEWS
Concerns grow for Adelaide man missing for 10 days in remote outback wilderness sanctuary in South Australia
Concerns are growing for a man who has been missing for 10 days in an outback wilderness area in South Australia. Police are appealing for public help to find the 39-year-old man, identified only as Kyle, who was last seen about midday on Sunday, June 1, at Arkaroola in the northern Flinders Ranges about 630km or an eight-hour drive from Adelaide. Kyle is about 180cm tall, with a slim build and chin-length dreadlocks. He is believed to be driving a white Toyota HiAce rental van with South Australian registration S129CWL. The van was last seen in the Arkaroola area just after 6am on Monday, June 2. Police are appealing for anyone who may have seen the van in the area between Arkroola and Yunta, about 280km south on the Barrier Hwy. Police believe the van was driven from Yunta to Arkaroola between May 30 and June 1. PolAir and emergency services crews have been searching the area between the two locations and around Arkaroola but have yet to locate Kyle, with concerns now growing for his welfare. Anyone with information or who has seen Kyle or the van is asked to call police immediately on 131 444.
