Keep Queensland’s Safe Police Pursuit Laws and Reject Police Pursuit Indemnity.

MEDIA RELEASE: Lived Experience Council Partners with Cairns Justice Reform Advocate Shane Cuthbert to Oppose Police Pursuit Indemnity - Queensland Parliament ePetition, “Stop Preventable Deaths: Keep Queensland’s Safe Police Pursuit Laws and Reject Police Pursuit Indemnity,” is open to eligible Queensland residents. https://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/Work-of-the-Assembly/Petitions/petition-details/4661-26

BRISBANE, QLD - The Australia New Zealand Lived Experience Advisory Council for Police-Related Deaths (ANZLEAC4PRD), alongside Cairns justice reform and community safety advocate Shane Cuthbert, has launched a statewide campaign opposing proposals to weaken accountability surrounding dangerous police pursuits in Queensland.

The campaign coincides with a formal Queensland Legislative Assembly ePetition sponsored by Mr Cuthbert as Lead Petitioner, calling on the Queensland Government to retain strong public-safety safeguards and reject proposals that would provide police officers with additional legal protection or indemnity for conduct arising from high-risk pursuits.

The campaign follows renewed debate about police pursuit laws and the level of protection that should apply to officers involved in pursuits.

Mr Cuthbert has previously advocated against unnecessary police pursuits and says the issue should not be framed as a contest between supporting police and supporting offenders, but as a question of how government and police can best protect innocent members of the community.

Quotes attributable to Lead Petitioner Shane Cuthbert:

"For years, I have advocated against unnecessary police pursuits because, fundamentally, this is about protecting human life-the lives of innocent motorists and pedestrians, our police officers, and ultimately, the individuals being pursued.

Today, we operate in a completely transformed policing environment. With tools like PolAir, CCTV, automatic number-plate recognition, and advanced intelligence systems, police have the technology to identify and track offenders safely, allowing for later apprehension under far less dangerous circumstances. 

This is particularly true when dealing with repeat young offenders. In most cases, police already know exactly who they are and where they can be found. We must ask ourselves a hard question: Is apprehending a suspect in the next five minutes worth putting an innocent family driving home, a pedestrian crossing the road, or another motorist directly in the path of a violent, high-speed chase?

While police cannot control an offender’s decision to steal a car or flee, they can control their own response. Initiating a pursuit frequently forces a fleeing driver to accelerate, cross into oncoming traffic, run red lights, and take increasingly catastrophic risks. This artificial escalation spreads immediate danger to everyone sharing the road. 

Furthermore, minimizing pursuits is about protecting our frontline officers. We should not force police into high-risk, high-speed environments when modern technology and strategic patience can achieve the exact same result without the immediate risk of death or serious injury.

This brings us to the critical issue of indemnity. If a pursuit is genuinely safe, lawful, properly authorized, and conducted in accordance with established policy, Queenslanders are entitled to ask why additional protection from criminal responsibility is even necessary.

If the proposed indemnity protects only lawful conduct, what does it actually achieve? If it protects conduct that would otherwise expose someone to criminal liability, then Parliament and the public deserve to know exactly where that line is being drawn, who decides when the protection applies, and what accountability remains when a pursuit goes devastatingly wrong."

Quotes attributable to ANZLEAC4PRD Spokesperson:

“Every high-speed pursuit is a multi-tonne missile launched into our community. It risks the lives of innocent motorists, pedestrians, cyclists, and officers themselves.

“The recent incident in Ipswich showed a complete disregard for public safety in a high-density shopping zone. If the QPUE succeeds in securing legal indemnity for these actions, it removes vital institutional accountability. We will see more preventable deaths, more shattered families, and zero legal recourse for victims.”

Core Demands of the Parliamentary ePetition:

Reject Police Pursuit Indemnity: Reject legislative amendments that would improperly shield officers from accountability or lower the threshold governing dangerous pursuits.

Put Human Life First: Reaffirm that protecting life and preventing serious injury must remain the overriding consideration in operational pursuit decisions.

Maintain Meaningful Accountability: Ensure police officers remain subject to appropriate criminal, disciplinary and institutional accountability where conduct falls outside the law or established safeguards.

Use Safer Alternatives First: Prioritise PolAir, CCTV, automatic number-plate recognition, intelligence gathering, vehicle identification and delayed apprehension wherever those methods can safely replace an immediate pursuit.

Keep Pursuit as a Last Resort: Ensure high-risk pursuits occur only where the danger of allowing the vehicle to continue clearly outweighs the risks created by pursuing it.

— END —