New South Wales Police are trialing a remotely operated drone enforcement program in the remote town of Moree, controlled from Sydney. Police stated this six-month trial, named “PolAir-Remote,” marks Australia’s first use of remotely piloted drones to assist local law enforcement.

Under the program, two drones are housed in an automated hangar on the roof of the Moree police station. Operated by officers in Sydney approximately 300 miles away, the drones can take off to track suspects in the air and automatically return to recharge after completing their missions. Police noted that the system’s first operational deployment occurred in January when a man suspected of a machete attack was apprehended. They also reported that during a four-day operation in February, the drones assisted in the arrest of seven individuals.

New South Wales Police Commissioner Marlan Rannian stated that Morrie’s distance from the Sydney control center makes it an “ideal location” for testing. Police Minister Yasmin Catley emphasized that drones are merely “one tool in the police toolbox” to combat youth crime, stressing the program is “not a surveillance system” and that flights will not be recorded unless specific cases warrant it.

Police indicated that if the trial proves successful, the technology may be rolled out to other areas, including towns facing similar youth crime challenges.

Commentary:

Drones may indeed enhance police efficiency in combating crime and improve community safety to some extent. However, when law enforcement technology penetrates residents’ living spaces, it inevitably fosters a sense of surveillance and even concerns about privacy infringement. Even if police insist drones “are not surveillance tools,” their ability to conduct prolonged aerial patrols over residential areas inherently grants surveillance capabilities. Without a clear legal framework and transparent data management mechanisms, such technology risks gradually evolving into a routine surveillance system.

Moreover, Moorie is a town with a significant Indigenous population, historically marked by severe racial segregation and prolonged police-community tensions. Against this backdrop, the police’s decision to pilot drone policing there risks being perceived by some residents as deploying unproven technology first on communities with relatively weaker social and political leverage, thereby deepening existing mistrust.

Before implementing such new technologies, governments should establish transparent oversight mechanisms and robust community consultation processes. They must clearly outline how relevant data is collected, stored, and deleted, while also providing a more explicit explanation of the legal framework governing the entire trial.

On March 11, 2026, the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) released its final report into the Robodebt scheme, following a nearly year-long investigation known as Operation Myrtleford. The commission examined six individuals referred by the Robodebt Royal Commission to determine if their actions constituted serious corrupt conduct.

The report found that two former senior public servants engaged in serious corrupt conduct. Mark Withnell, a former general manager at the Department of Human Services, was found to have intentionally misled the Department of Social Services during the preparation of a 2015 cabinet submission. Serena Wilson, a former deputy secretary, was found to have intentionally misled the Commonwealth Ombudsman during a 2017 investigation into the scheme. Despite these findings, the NACC stated it would not refer either individual for criminal prosecution, citing a lack of sufficient admissible evidence to prove charges beyond a reasonable doubt.

The NACC cleared the remaining four individuals, including former Prime Minister Scott Morrison and former departmental head Kathryn Campbell. The commission determined that while Morrison initiated the program, his failure to realize that departmental advice was misleading was due to institutional shortcomings rather than personal dishonesty or bad faith. Following the release of the report, the federal government announced it would move to table the previously sealed chapter of the Royal Commission’s report.

On March 11, 2026, ABC News reported that seven members of the Iranian women’s football team sought asylum in Australia following the Women’s Asian Cup. While six members remained in Australia under humanitarian visas, one player chose to return to Iran at the final moment before her flight departed from Sydney Airport.

The player who returned had initially intended to stay in Australia. However, community members and sources close to the team reported she reversed her decision due to concerns for her family’s safety. ABC News confirmed it had heard a voice note sent by the player’s mother to a member of the Iranian-Australian community. In the recording, the mother urged her daughter not to return to Iran, stating that she would be killed if she did.

The Iranian government had previously labeled the team “wartime traitors” after players refused to sing the national anthem during their opening match against South Korea. Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke confirmed that the Australian government granted visas to those who requested protection, but noted that some players felt compelled to return to Iran because of threats and intimidation directed at their families.