SPECIAL REPORT Safety in numbers Australia’s private security guard force and counterterrorism Anthony Bergin, Donald Williams and Christopher Dixon October 2018 About the authors Anthony Bergin is a senior analyst at ASPI and a senior research fellow at the National Security College, Australian National University. For 20 years Dr Bergin served as an academic at the Australian Defence Force Academy where he taught homeland security. From 1991 to 2003 he was the director of the Australian Defence Studies Centre. He served for four years as an adjunct reader in law at the ANU, where he taught international law. Dr Bergin has been a consultant to a wide range of public- and private-sector clients and has written extensively on national security issues in academic journals, books and reports. He is a regular media commentator and contributes to ASPI’s The Strategist and the Crawford School of Public Policy’s Policy Forum. Donald Williams holds qualifications in security management as well as risk, project and resource management. He is a certified Protection Professional and Registered Security Professional. He is a member of ASIS International, the Institute of Explosives Engineers and the International Association of Bomb Technicians and Investigators. He is the author of numerous papers, books and security standards. Christopher Dixon was a research intern at ASPI in 2017–18. He graduated with first-class honours from the RMIT Bachelor of Arts (International Studies) (Honours) program. His research interests include Australian defence and national security policy. About ASPI ASPI’s aim is to promote Australia’s security by contributing fresh ideas to strategic decision‑making, and by helping to inform public discussion of strategic and defence issues. ASPI was established, and is partially funded, by the Australian Government as an independent, non‑partisan policy institute. It is incorporated as a company, and is governed by a Council with broad membership. ASPI’s core values are collegiality, originality & innovation, quality & excellence and independence. ASPI’s publications—including this paper—are not intended in any way to express or reflect the views of the Australian Government. The opinions and recommendations in this paper are published by ASPI to promote public debate and understanding of strategic and defence issues. They reflect the personal views of the author(s) and should not be seen as representing the formal position of ASPI on any particular issue. Important disclaimer This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in relation to the subject matter covered. It is provided with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering any form of professional or other advice or services. No person should rely on the contents of this publication without first obtaining advice from a qualified professional person. Cover image: Security guard watching football fans. Photo: kolvenbach/Alamy Stock Photo. Safety in numbers Australia’s private security guard force and counterterrorism Anthony Bergin, Donald Williams and Christopher Dixon October 2018 © The Australian Strategic Policy Institute Limited 2018 This publication is subject to copyright. Except as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part of it may in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, microcopying, photocopying, recording or otherwise) be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted without prior written permission. Enquiries should be addressed to the publishers. Notwithstanding the above, educational institutions (including schools, independent colleges, universities and TAFEs) are granted permission to make copies of copyrighted works strictly for educational purposes without explicit permission from ASPI and free of charge. First published October 2018 Published in Australia by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute ASPI Level 2 40 Macquarie Street Barton ACT 2600 Australia Tel + 61 2 6270 5100 Fax + 61 2 6273 9566 Email [email protected] www.aspi.org.au www.aspistrategist.org.au Facebook.com/ASPI.org @ASPI_org CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 INTRODUCTION 6 COUNTERTERRORISM PLANNING 8 SECURITY OFFICERS 10 COUNTERTERRORISM CAPABILITIES 20 THE STATE OF THE INDUSTRY 23 PUBLIC–PRIVATE COOPERATION 27 THE WAY AHEAD 30 CONCLUDING REMARKS 33 APPENDIX 1 36 APPENDIX 2 39 NOTES 40 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 42 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The private security manpower sector plays a significant role in both preventing and responding to critical incidents, including terrorist attacks. Private security staff provide the ‘eyes, ears and hands’ before any attack and an ability to be first responders after any security-related incident. By observing non-routine behaviour and unusual objects, they provide a deterrent through their presence, maintaining checkpoints, conducting bag screening and so on. They’re already on the spot and generally have an intimate knowledge of the normal comings and goings at each site. They’re uniformed and easily recognisable. They’re trained, albeit to varying levels, and can provide a cordon or direct people away from dangers. They understand command and control and communications. They’re used at large public gatherings such as major sporting events, community festivals, celebrations and special events, such as the Commonwealth Games. Private security also provides an important and significant presence at public transport hubs such as airports, railway stations and shipping ports as a line of defence and deterrence. In manpower numbers, the private guarding industry is much more significant than the police or military. The security industry has more than double the personnel of Australia’s combined police agencies and permanent ADF. National and jurisdictional forums for addressing counterterrorism (CT) include venue owners and operators, but the providers of guarding services aren’t always at the table. Given the many thousands of men and women working around the clock every day in every type of private, business and community facility, it’s critical to recognise their efforts in helping to prevent attacks and responding to security incidents. This report identifies the role of the private security sector in countering hostile threats—including terrorism—and the functions that the sector does or could provide in critical incidents and national CT planning. The private security sector is a continuum, ranging from security guards to chief security executives of major corporations. This report’s focus is, however, specifically on the private security guarding sector. While the guarding services workforce is expected and may even be contracted to carry out actions that relate to CT, the current lack of appropriate and consistent training, the lack of consistent ‘fit and proper person’ requirements, the poor pay, general low esteem and inconsistencies between jurisdictions limit its ability and full potential in this role. Governments have failed to provide consistent definitions, ‘fit and proper person’ tests, training requirements and monitoring of training for the guarding sector, especially in the area of terrorism preparedness and response. Executive summary 5 Based on wide stakeholder consultation, it’s clear that clients (including government) of guarding providers tend to seek the lowest prices, often below award rates, without consideration of the quality of service provided. There are, however, pockets of excellence where private security is fully integrated, trusted and delivering effective security outcomes, but multijurisdictional inconsistencies and poorly delivered training remain key problems for the security guarding workforce. A nationally consistent vetting, training and licensing system would greatly enhance the ability of licensed security officers to identify, prevent and respond to critical incidents and hostile threats, such as terrorism. We suggest that the way ahead is to establish a federal Security Industry Authority (SIA) responsible to the Minister for Home Affairs. The functions of the SIA would include: • the integration of the private security manpower sector into Australia’s counterterrorism strategy • ‘fit and proper person’ definition and assessment • training development and monitoring of delivery standards • external confirmation of testing and competencies • the development and promulgation of additional CT awareness and training information. Through a centrally coordinated SIA, Australia’s licensed guarding services sector will be able to more fully contribute to Australia’s capabilities to prevent and respond to terrorism. Recommendations 1. State and territory regulators should better monitor and enforce training standards within the licensed guarding sector. 2. Training courses should include material on recognising suspicious behaviour associated with pre-incident terrorism activities and how and where to report suspicious activities. 3. The security guarding sector should consider a career progression model for security officers. 4. Consideration should be given to formalising additional powers for suitably trained security officers to enhance their ability to contribute to CT capabilities. 5. The private security guarding sector should be engaged in relevant national and state forums that consider CT. 6. Law enforcement agencies should be encouraged to liaise with the private security sector and have representatives from the sector address training courses to explain their functions and powers. 7. A federal Security Industry