The NSWCCL opposes outdoor alcohol restrictions in public places, including alcohol-free zones and alcohol prohibited areas in parks and public spaces. We argue that these restrictions impede on freedom of movement and disproportionately affect marginalised individuals. Instead, we advocate for evidence-based harm minimisation programs and support services.

Out full submission is below. 

We recommend that the Government bins this repugnant bill and we urge all of our members to take a vocal, immediate stand against it. It attempts to legitimate the exclusion, detention, and criminalisation of people based on where they are born. The NSWCCL recommends that the Government reconsider its approach to legislating on this issue and engage in a more transparent and consultative process reflective of the importance of the fundamental principles of democracy including the separation of powers and rule of law.

In New South Wales, the Ethical Clothing Trades Extended Responsibility Scheme operates as a mandatory scheme for protecting the entitlements of outworkers in the textile clothing and footwear industries (TCF). The term ‘outworkers' refer to workers who perform work outside conventional business premises and factories, and instead in their own residential premises. The problem with the scheme is that it hasn't been operational since around 2014 and in the ensuing years the functions of Scheme have been incorporated by the legislative regime created by the Fair Work Act and employment and workplace safety legislation. The devil is the detail. Our submission urges that the government ensure suitable resourcing is available for reporting and enforcement in Australia AND we do more, much more, to ensure that international supply chains are free from modern slavery.

At present in Australia we rely on a public lobbyist Register and a Code of Conduct that does not cover the majority of lobbyists. Third party, or commercial lobbyists are paid professionals who are engaged by clients to make representations to influence public officials on their behalf, while in-house lobbyists are those that seek to influence public officials on behalf of their employer. Industries hire professional in-house lobbyists and former politicians for their connections, paying fees well outside the budget of non-corporate actors. This is simply NOT good enough!

Fossil fuel industry lobbyists have included former Liberal Party, National Party and ALP ministers. We know that lobbying by the fossil fuel industry to hinder effective climate action has been successful in slowing down Australia’s response to the Climate Crisis. Recent history shows us that relentless lobbying knocked out Australia’s chance to have an effective emissions trading scheme, a mining tax and price on carbon. If the halls of Parliament are saturated by industry lobbyists and not counterbalanced by community voices, politicians’ views will be skewed to favour industry.

Safeguarding our democracy from the pressures of big money and big influence will improve the functioning of government and ensure that political outcomes are in the public’s best interests. The Australian public deserve those who they have elected to serve their interests – and their interests alone.

Australians are at risk of further losing faith and trust in our civil institutions, our political institutions and our elected politicians if Governments do not embrace transparency and accountability advocated in our submission.

Misinformation and disinformation in political advertising is a widespread problem in Australia. We think, that NSW should have truth in political advertising laws for NSW state elections and believe that such laws would enhance the integrity and transparency of the electoral system. Misleading political advertising can cause serious societal harms including:

• the erosion of trust in democratic processes;
• the weakening of trust between and among public and private entities;
• the weakening legitimacy of the social contract between voters and elected representatives; and
• the undermining of an informed populace.

In our submission to Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters (Committee) regarding the administration of the 2023 NSW state election and other matters. We express views in respect of:

• political donations from property developers, including through shell companies and charities;
• truth in political advertising;
• the timeliness of political donation disclosures; and
• electoral participation and enfranchisement, particularly regarding imprisoned persons and people living with disability.

Read our submission here.

NSWCCL endorses the draft recommendations of the Commission which will bring reforms to the Deductible Gift Recipient (DGR) system, making it more transparent, simpler, fairer and more consistent. The current DGR system is complex legislation and operates under outdated categories that do not capture the diversity of modern Australian charities. In our submission we comment specifically on areas that require further action to ensure a more democratic process and that align more consistently with civil rights. Our submission also concentrates on the system that determines which entities in Australia can receive tax deductable donations rather than tax incentives encouraging donation.  

The Bill was introduced into Parliament on 29 November 2023, and was passed by both Houses on 6 December 2023. Now in force as the Australian Citizenship Amendment (Citizenship Repudiation) Act 2023 (Act), it has repealed and replaced provisions of Subdivision C of Division 3 of Part 2 of the Australian Citizenship Act 2007.

This Bill should have been referred to the PJCIS to allow proper scrutiny before, not after, the Bill passed. This legislation was rushed through both the House and the Senate with very limited consultation, no exposure drafts and very short notice. In our view, no clear or adequate justification has been given for this rushed process.

In 2015, in a highly politicised environment, where there was very little nuanced public debate regarding national security, the Australian government added citizenship revocation on terrorism-related grounds (citizenship stripping) into the Australian Citizenship Act. Citizenship revocation was introduced to both dissuade disaffected people from committing acts of terrorism, as well as addressing the anticipated risks that individuals who had been convicted of terrorism related offences may pose to the community upon their release.

The New South Wales Council for Civil Liberties considers that the powers contained in Division 3 of Part III of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979 (Cth) (Division 3) disproportionately infringe on fundamental civil liberties, create a serious threat to the rule of law in Australia, and moreover, no longer have the utility which precipitated their creation. The NSWCCL submits that Division 3 should be repealed in full.

The Division 3 powers, when introduced, were cast as a transient response to an exceptional set of events, as a response to the perceived terrorism threat following the 9/11 attacks. However, more than two decades on, and what were once powers of unprecedented and exceptional reach, are now a permanent feature of Australia’s legal landscape. Given the reduction in the threat of terrorism, coupled with the fact that Division 3 powers have rarely been utilised, the powers given to Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) under Division 3 are now well beyond the scope of what is reasonably necessary. They overstep intelligence collection and veer into investigatory powers that are properly the purvey of law enforcement agencies.

In our submission about the Australian Government Digital Identity System (AGDIS) we have underscored our commitment to safeguarding civil liberties in the face of evolving digital identity systems.

While NSW Council for Civil Liberties (NSWCCL) endorses the codification of AGDIS, which includes the Document Verification Service and facial verification technology, concerns persist regarding the lack of an effective legal framework. Recent high-profile data breaches underscore the urgency of regulation and enforcement in identity protection. The impetus for the swift introduction of this legislation is the imperative to address cybercrime, but recent amendments fall short in addressing crucial issues.

The NSW Council for Civil Liberties is opposed to Senator Malcolm Roberts' proposal for a Royal Commission into COVID-19. We believe that such an inquiry is both unnecessary and potentially harmful, and we urge the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee to carefully consider the implications of this call.