Security Intelligence

Close Protection in Australia and New Zealand: Security for the Asia-Pacific Hub | CloseProtectionHire

Q: "What is the terrorism threat level in Australia in 2026?"

"Australia's national terrorism threat level is assessed by ASIO (the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation). The threat level for Australia has been set at 'Probable' -- the third of five levels on the ASIO scale -- since November 2014. ASIO's Annual Threat Assessment identifies Islamic extremism and, increasingly, right-wing extremism (RWE) as the primary threat streams. The 2021 ASIO threat assessment stated that RWE now accounts for approximately 40% of ASIO's domestic counter-terrorism caseload. The 2017 Melbourne Bourke Street attack (6 killed) and 2018 Melbourne Bourke Street stabbing (1 killed) were both conducted by individuals with mental health vulnerabilities and, in the 2017 case, Islamist motivation. Australia has disrupted numerous plots since 2014. The threat is genuine but context-specific -- the probability of any individual visit being affected by a terrorism incident is low, and the general street crime environment is well below levels in P1 cities."

Q: "How does the security industry licensing framework work in Australia?"

"Security licensing in Australia is state and territory-regulated, not nationally standardised, which creates complexity for operators providing protection across multiple Australian jurisdictions. Each of the 8 jurisdictions (New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, Western Australia, South Australia, Tasmania, ACT, Northern Territory) has its own legislation and licence structure. NSW operates under the Security Industry Act 1997; Queensland under the Security Industry Act 2003; Victoria under the Private Security Act 2004. In all jurisdictions, a close protection operative requires an individual licence (equivalent to the SIA Door Supervisor licence in the UK), and a security firm requires a master or operator licence. Background check and training requirements vary by state. ASIAL (Australian Security Industry Association Limited) provides an industry-level framework for training standards. Armed close protection is available in Australia through licensed firearms arrangements but is significantly less common than in comparable international markets -- the regulatory threshold for firearms licensing for CP work is high."

Q: "What security risks apply to business travel to Sydney and Melbourne?"

"Sydney and Melbourne are both classified as low-risk business destinations for personal security by OSAC and Control Risks. The specific risk factors that merit planning attention are: terrorism (ASIO 'Probable' threat level, primarily targeting crowded public spaces, transport infrastructure, and symbolic sites); the organised crime environment (Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs/OMCGs -- the Bandidos, Comanchero, Hells Angels, and Rebels have a documented presence in both cities and occasional violence that can affect bystanders in wrong-place/wrong-time incidents); residential and opportunistic crime in specific suburbs; and digital security considerations for commercially sensitive visits (ASIO has documented foreign intelligence service targeting of business visitors). For standard corporate travel, the risk environment requires awareness protocols rather than active close protection in most cases."

Q: "What are the main security considerations for business travel to New Zealand?"

"New Zealand consistently ranks among the world's lowest-risk countries for business travel. The NZSIS (New Zealand Security Intelligence Service) identifies foreign interference (primarily from the PRC) and right-wing extremism as the primary domestic security threats. The 2019 Christchurch mosque attacks (51 killed, conducted by an Australian national) prompted a substantial review of New Zealand's security architecture and led to the Arms (Firearms and Other Matters) Amendment Act 2021, which banned semi-automatic and assault-style firearms. The practical implication for business visitors is that New Zealand's threat environment requires standard travel security awareness, not close protection for most visits. The exceptions would be principals who carry a personal threat assessment that follows them to any destination, or operations in specific sectors (Pacific region extractive industries, diplomatic, or intelligence-adjacent) where threat is principal-specific rather than environmental."

Q: "Is armed close protection available in Australia and New Zealand?"

"Armed close protection in Australia is legally possible through licensed firearms arrangements under state-level security legislation, but it is significantly less common than in comparable markets like the US or parts of Europe. The firearms licensing requirements for CP work are high, and most commercial CP assignments in Australia are conducted unarmed. In New Zealand, the 2019 Arms Amendment Act significantly tightened firearms access; armed CP for commercial assignments is not a standard market offering. For principals who require an armed capability in Australia, the engagement must be through an operator with the appropriate state-level security and firearms licences, and the requirement should be based on a genuine threat assessment rather than default preference. The quality of protection from a well-trained unarmed CP team in the Australian context is operationally appropriate for the vast majority of assignments."

Close protection in Australia and New Zealand: ASIO terrorism threat levels, state-by-state security licensing, Swedish-style gang violence in Sydney, Christchurch legacy, and CP operational planning across both countries.

4 May 2026

Written by James Whitfield

Speak to the Team

Australia and New Zealand sit at the low end of the global security risk spectrum for business travel. The standard street crime environment in Sydney, Melbourne, Auckland, and Wellington is materially below that of any P1 city. But low risk is not zero risk, and the threat landscape has specific characteristics that differ meaningfully from the simple headline.

This guide covers the current threat environment across both countries, the close protection licensing framework, and the operational planning considerations for assignments in the Australia-New Zealand region.

Australia

The general risk environment: Australia is a high-income, stable democracy with effective law enforcement and well-functioning rule of law. For most business visitors, the security environment requires awareness protocols rather than active close protection. The exceptions are: principals who carry a personal threat level that requires protection at any destination; operations in specific commercial sectors where threat is principal-specific (high-profile corporate litigation, extractive sector disputes, organised crime-adjacent industries); and individuals with a significant public profile who attract elevated public attention.

ASIO terrorism threat assessment: ASIO has maintained the national terrorism threat at ‘Probable’ since November 2014. The primary threat streams are Islamist-motivated attacks (lone actor, targeting crowded public spaces and symbolic sites) and right-wing extremism (RWE), which ASIO identified in its 2021 Annual Threat Assessment as representing approximately 40% of its domestic counter-terrorism caseload.

The practical implication for business visitors is awareness of the ‘crowded places’ threat pattern – the 2017 Melbourne Bourke Street attack (6 killed, vehicle as weapon) and the 2018 Melbourne Bourke Street stabbing (1 killed) both targeted the central business district. ASIO and the Australian Federal Police’s counter-terrorism advice for business visitors includes standard awareness protocols: knowledge of venue emergency exits, familiarity with Run-Hide-Tell, and avoidance of identified high-risk situations.

Organised crime: Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs (OMCGs) – including the Bandidos, Comanchero, Hells Angels, and Rebels – have documented presence across Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, and regional Queensland. OMCG violence is primarily targeted (between rival groups) but has resulted in bystander incidents in venues. Executive planning should include venue selection awareness in OMCG-active areas, primarily concentrated in specific suburbs rather than the central business districts.

Licensing framework: Close protection in Australia is regulated state by state. Each of the 8 jurisdictions has separate legislation and licensing requirements. NSW operates under the Security Industry Act 1997; Queensland under the Security Industry Act 2003; Victoria under the Private Security Act 2004. A CP operative requires an individual licence in each jurisdiction where they work. The lack of national reciprocity means that an operator providing protection across a Sydney-Melbourne itinerary must hold the appropriate licences in both states.

ASIAL (Australian Security Industry Association Limited) sets industry training standards and is a useful quality indicator for operator assessment. Membership does not substitute for jurisdiction-specific licensing verification.

Armed close protection: Legally possible through state-level firearms licensing arrangements, but significantly less common than in the US or parts of Europe. The regulatory threshold is high. Most commercial CP assignments in Australia are conducted unarmed, and this is operationally appropriate for the majority of the risk environment.

New Zealand

The general risk environment: New Zealand consistently registers among the world’s lowest violent crime rates. The Global Peace Index has ranked New Zealand in the top five globally in multiple recent editions. For standard business visits to Auckland, Wellington, or Christchurch, the security risk is minimal.

Christchurch 2019: The March 2019 mosque attacks (51 killed, perpetrated by an Australian national) remain a defining moment in New Zealand’s security architecture. The Royal Commission of Inquiry (2020) identified specific failures in intelligence sharing and venue security planning. The subsequent Counter-Terrorism Legislation Act 2021 and revised NZSIS operating protocols have strengthened the institutional framework. The attacks prompted the Arms (Firearms and Other Matters) Amendment Act 2021, which banned semi-automatic and assault-style firearms.

The legacy for business visitors is that major public venues, crowded event locations, and government buildings now apply more rigorous security planning than pre-2019. The threat environment is lower than in Australia, not because the country is immune from terrorism, but because the post-2019 intelligence and prevention framework is more active.

Foreign interference: The NZSIS identifies foreign interference – primarily from the PRC – as a sustained security concern. New Zealand’s role in the Five Eyes intelligence alliance and its proximity to Pacific island states gives it strategic significance. Commercial visitors in technology, resources, or strategic sectors should apply appropriate digital security protocols.

Operational Planning

MEDEVAC: Australia has the Royal Flying Doctor Service (RFDS), which covers remote and rural Australia with air ambulance capability. The major cities have major trauma centres at standard comparable to any Western country. New Zealand’s major cities have equivalent hospital infrastructure. For remote operations in the Australian outback or New Zealand’s South Island alpine regions, MEDEVAC planning should include a registered air ambulance service (CareFlight or RFDS in Australia; Westpac Rescue Helicopter in NZ) and travel insurance with specific medical evacuation cover.

Natural hazard overlay: Australia’s bushfire season (October to March in the southern states, year-round in the north) creates specific disruption and evacuation planning requirements for operations in regional or peri-urban areas. The Black Summer 2019-2020 fires killed 33 people directly and caused widespread infrastructure disruption. New Zealand has significant seismic and volcanic risk: the Christchurch earthquakes of 2010-2011 (185 killed in the February 2011 event) and ongoing volcanic activity in the Waikato and Bay of Plenty regions are relevant for operations outside major cities.

For the broader Asia-Pacific CP framework – including the Southeast Asian markets with distinctly higher risk profiles – see our close protection in the Asia-Pacific guide. For the Southeast Asia-specific environments (Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam, Malaysia, Myanmar) see our close protection in Southeast Asia guide.

Sources

ASIO: Annual Threat Assessment 2025. NZSIS: Annual Report 2025. OSAC: Australia Country Security Report 2024. OSAC: New Zealand Country Security Report 2024. Control Risks RiskMap 2025. FCDO: Travel Advice Australia and New Zealand, April 2026. Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Terrorist Attack on Christchurch Mosques, 2020. ASIAL: Australian Security Industry Standards 2024. Global Peace Index 2025 (Institute for Economics and Peace). AFP: Counter-Terrorism Advice for Business 2024. ACLED: Australia and New Zealand Political Violence Dataset 2024.

For close protection operations in the Pacific Island nations north of Australia – Papua New Guinea, Fiji, Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, and French Polynesia – including operator selection, MEDEVAC planning, and natural disaster contingency, see our close protection in the Pacific Islands guide.

James Whitfield is a Senior Security Consultant with 20 years of experience in close protection and security risk management across Asia-Pacific and high-risk environments globally.

Summary

Key takeaways

Australia's ASIO 'Probable' terrorism threat level is genuine but should be read in conjunction with the low baseline street crime environment

The 'Probable' level means ASIO assesses that individuals or groups have the intent and capability to conduct an attack. It does not mean an attack is imminent or that any given principal is at elevated personal risk. For most corporate visits, the terrorism threat is a contingency awareness matter -- knowing Run-Hide-Tell, avoiding crowded public spaces during peak periods -- rather than a driver for full close protection deployment.

Security licensing in Australia is state-by-state -- an operator licensed in NSW is not automatically cleared to work in Queensland or Victoria

The lack of national reciprocity in Australian security licensing is a practical planning issue for principals travelling across multiple states. The CP provider must hold the appropriate individual licence in each jurisdiction where protection services are delivered. An international firm providing protection across a Sydney-Melbourne-Brisbane itinerary needs to verify licensing status in all three states. ASIAL membership is a useful quality indicator but does not substitute for jurisdiction-specific licensing verification.

Sydney's organised crime environment -- primarily OMCG activity -- is materially different from the wider Australian risk profile and warrants specific awareness

Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs have a documented presence in Sydney, Melbourne, and regional Queensland. Violence between OMCGs is primarily targeted (gang-on-gang) but has resulted in bystander incidents. Executive visits to venues or areas with OMCG association carry a residual risk. Standard precautions -- venue selection, avoidance of known OMCG-associated locations -- manage this adequately in the vast majority of cases.

New Zealand's post-Christchurch security improvements have materially elevated the quality of protective security planning at public venues

The Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Christchurch attack (2020) identified specific failures in intelligence sharing and venue security planning. The subsequent legislative and operational changes -- including the Counter-Terrorism Legislation Act 2021 and revised NZSIS sharing protocols -- have improved the institutional framework. For business visitors, the practical implication is that major public venues in Auckland and Wellington now apply security planning more rigorously than pre-2019.

Digital security for commercially sensitive visits to Australia requires specific attention to PRC-linked intelligence collection

ASIO's annual threat assessments identify foreign interference -- primarily from the PRC -- as a sustained priority. This includes targeting of business visitors in commercial negotiations, resources sector joint ventures, and technology transfer contexts. The same clean device protocol applicable to visits to China applies in attenuated form to high-value commercial visits to Australia: the risk is lower, but not absent.

FAQ

Frequently Asked Questions

Australia’s national terrorism threat level is assessed by ASIO (the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation). The threat level for Australia has been set at ‘Probable’ – the third of five levels on the ASIO scale – since November 2014. ASIO’s Annual Threat Assessment identifies Islamic extremism and, increasingly, right-wing extremism (RWE) as the primary threat streams. The 2021 ASIO threat assessment stated that RWE now accounts for approximately 40% of ASIO’s domestic counter-terrorism caseload. The 2017 Melbourne Bourke Street attack (6 killed) and 2018 Melbourne Bourke Street stabbing (1 killed) were both conducted by individuals with mental health vulnerabilities and, in the 2017 case, Islamist motivation. Australia has disrupted numerous plots since 2014. The threat is genuine but context-specific – the probability of any individual visit being affected by a terrorism incident is low, and the general street crime environment is well below levels in P1 cities.

Security licensing in Australia is state and territory-regulated, not nationally standardised, which creates complexity for operators providing protection across multiple Australian jurisdictions. Each of the 8 jurisdictions (New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, Western Australia, South Australia, Tasmania, ACT, Northern Territory) has its own legislation and licence structure. NSW operates under the Security Industry Act 1997; Queensland under the Security Industry Act 2003; Victoria under the Private Security Act 2004. In all jurisdictions, a close protection operative requires an individual licence (equivalent to the SIA Door Supervisor licence in the UK), and a security firm requires a master or operator licence. Background check and training requirements vary by state. ASIAL (Australian Security Industry Association Limited) provides an industry-level framework for training standards. Armed close protection is available in Australia through licensed firearms arrangements but is significantly less common than in comparable international markets – the regulatory threshold for firearms licensing for CP work is high.

Sydney and Melbourne are both classified as low-risk business destinations for personal security by OSAC and Control Risks. The specific risk factors that merit planning attention are: terrorism (ASIO ‘Probable’ threat level, primarily targeting crowded public spaces, transport infrastructure, and symbolic sites); the organised crime environment (Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs/OMCGs – the Bandidos, Comanchero, Hells Angels, and Rebels have a documented presence in both cities and occasional violence that can affect bystanders in wrong-place/wrong-time incidents); residential and opportunistic crime in specific suburbs; and digital security considerations for commercially sensitive visits (ASIO has documented foreign intelligence service targeting of business visitors). For standard corporate travel, the risk environment requires awareness protocols rather than active close protection in most cases.

New Zealand consistently ranks among the world’s lowest-risk countries for business travel. The NZSIS (New Zealand Security Intelligence Service) identifies foreign interference (primarily from the PRC) and right-wing extremism as the primary domestic security threats. The 2019 Christchurch mosque attacks (51 killed, conducted by an Australian national) prompted a substantial review of New Zealand’s security architecture and led to the Arms (Firearms and Other Matters) Amendment Act 2021, which banned semi-automatic and assault-style firearms. The practical implication for business visitors is that New Zealand’s threat environment requires standard travel security awareness, not close protection for most visits. The exceptions would be principals who carry a personal threat assessment that follows them to any destination, or operations in specific sectors (Pacific region extractive industries, diplomatic, or intelligence-adjacent) where threat is principal-specific rather than environmental.

Armed close protection in Australia is legally possible through licensed firearms arrangements under state-level security legislation, but it is significantly less common than in comparable markets like the US or parts of Europe. The firearms licensing requirements for CP work are high, and most commercial CP assignments in Australia are conducted unarmed. In New Zealand, the 2019 Arms Amendment Act significantly tightened firearms access; armed CP for commercial assignments is not a standard market offering. For principals who require an armed capability in Australia, the engagement must be through an operator with the appropriate state-level security and firearms licences, and the requirement should be based on a genuine threat assessment rather than default preference. The quality of protection from a well-trained unarmed CP team in the Australian context is operationally appropriate for the vast majority of assignments.

Get in Touch

Request a Consultation

Describe your security requirements below. All enquiries are confidential and handled by licensed consultants.