This bill became law on Sep 13th, 2023.
Law, justice & rights
Businesses that start offering regulated financial services face clearer penalties if they do not enrol with AUSTRACAustralia's financial intelligence agency, which collects reports from businesses and is the main regulator affected by the bill's penalty and secrecy fixes. within 28 days.
Gaps and drafting problems left AUSTRACAustralia's financial intelligence agency, which collects reports from businesses and is the main regulator affected by the bill's penalty and secrecy fixes. penalties and secrecy rules unclear and delayed bail and prisoner-transfer decisions. The bill clarifies penalties and protected information, fixes technical errors, and lets officials make earlier, safer decisions in criminal justice processes.
Before this bill, several Commonwealth laws already governed money-laundering reporting, court secrecy, bail, prisoner transfers and overseas criminal assistance, but drafting gaps and technical errors left some penalties unclear, protected AUSTRACAustralia's financial intelligence agency, which collects reports from businesses and is the main regulator affected by the bill's penalty and secrecy fixes. material exposed to disclosure risks, and some decisions slower or harder to make. The bill was introduced in March 2023 to tidy those faults without expanding core powers, then passed Parliament in September 2023 so agencies, courts and ministers could apply clearer rules and make earlier decisions in routine criminal justice matters.
The main criticism was not that the bill’s overall goals were wrong, but that an omnibus package changing criminal law, national security and prisoner-transfer rules was being passed with too little scrutiny and some safeguards still in dispute. Coalition senators and the Greens still supported the bill, but they warned that automated decision-making, fairness in prisoner-transfer decisions and related human rights protections needed closer review.
Mark Dreyfus MP introduced this bill. It passed on the voices.
Did it become law?
Yes
Became law 13 Sept 2023
Final passage
Passed without a counted vote
1 recorded amendment or procedural vote was found, but no counted vote on the bill itself was recorded.
Passage speed
168 days
From introduction to the latest recorded parliamentary step
Meaning
Businesses that start offering regulated financial services face clearer penalties if they do not enrol with AUSTRACAustralia's financial intelligence agency, which collects reports from businesses and is the main regulator affected by the bill's penalty and secrecy fixes. within 28 days.
Sensitive AUSTRACAustralia's financial intelligence agency, which collects reports from businesses and is the main regulator affected by the bill's penalty and secrecy fixes. reports will be better protected from being disclosed in court or tribunal cases.
People arrested for Commonwealth offences can be brought before a local bail decision-maker sooner, reducing unnecessary time in custody.
The Attorney-General can refuse an international prisoner transfer earlier, so prisoners, states and foreign governments are not drawn into a process that will likely be rejected.
Australia must refuse an overseas criminal assistance request where there are substantial grounds to believe any person, including a witness or another affected person, would be in danger of torture if the request were granted.
strengthen and clarify the civil penalty provision for a person failing to enrol with AUSTRAC within 28 days of commencing to provide a designated service under the AML/CTF ActCrimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Omnibus) explanatory memorandum
clarify the existing secrecy and access framework to make it clear that sensitive AUSTRAC information obtained under specified provisions of the AML/CTF Act and the Financial Transaction Reports Act 1988 (FTR Act) cannot be inappropriately disclosed for the purposes of, or in connection with, court or tribunal proceedings, andCrimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Omnibus) explanatory memorandum
Bail is a long-established principle of the justice system which allows a person who has been arrested and charged to be released from custody while they wait to appear in court. The amendments to Part IC in Part 1 of Schedule 3 will not impact the ability or statutory requirements that must be met in order for a person to obtain bail. Changing references from ‘judicial officer’ to ‘bail authority’ in Part IC will simply ensure that persons arrested in the above circumstances can be brought before a magistrate or a bail officer in the state where the offence occurred, which will ensure they person is bailed or remanded into custody in a timely manner.Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Omnibus) explanatory memorandum
Amendments to the International Transfer of Prisoners Act 1997will allow the Attorney-General to refuse consent to applications for transfers to or from Australia at an earlier stage, instead of at the very end of the process. This will make the process more efficient and reduce administrative burdens by ensuring that state and territory governments, foreign countries and prisoners are not unnecessarily consulted where the Attorney-General would be minded to ultimately refuse consent but is unable to do so before seeking consent from all other parties.Second reading speech
This amendment expands the scope of the ground of refusal so that the Attorney-General must refuse requests where there are substantial grounds to believe that any person would be in danger of being subjected to torture if the request were granted.Second reading speech
Context
Before this bill, several Commonwealth laws already governed money-laundering reporting, court secrecy, bail, prisoner transfers and overseas criminal assistance, but drafting gaps and technical errors left some penalties unclear, protected AUSTRACAustralia's financial intelligence agency, which collects reports from businesses and is the main regulator affected by the bill's penalty and secrecy fixes. material exposed to disclosure risks, and some decisions slower or harder to make. The bill was introduced in March 2023 to tidy those faults without expanding core powers, then passed Parliament in September 2023 so agencies, courts and ministers could apply clearer rules and make earlier decisions in routine criminal justice matters.
Government identifies drafting gaps across criminal justice laws
The second reading speech said existing Commonwealth laws needed technical fixes so law enforcement, oversight and judicial processes could work as originally intended without changing core powers.
Hansard ↗Omnibus billA bill that bundles several separate but related law changes into one package, which is why this bill covers many different Acts. introduced to clarify penalties, secrecy and decision-making rules
The bill was introduced to fix unclear AUSTRACAustralia's financial intelligence agency, which collects reports from businesses and is the main regulator affected by the bill's penalty and secrecy fixes. enrolment penalties, protect sensitive reports from disclosure, and streamline bail, prisoner-transfer and mutual-assistance decisions.
Parliamentary timeline ↗House passes the bill
Passage through the House sent the package of technical amendments to the Senate for consideration.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Parliament passes the bill
Both houses agreed on the final form of the bill, clearing the way for the technical fixes to become law.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Royal AssentThe final step that turns a bill passed by Parliament into an Act of Parliament. makes the fixes law
Royal AssentThe final step that turns a bill passed by Parliament into an Act of Parliament. turned the bill into an Act so the clarified rules could be applied in day-to-day regulatory and criminal justice administration.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Legislative route
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Referred to Federation Chamber
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
Referred to Committee (10/05/2023): Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (14/06/2023)
Referred to committee
APH bill page notesThe bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Reported from Federation Chamber
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber. Later message exchanges with the other chamber were still recorded afterwards.
Third reading agreed to
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
Committee of the Whole debate
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Third reading agreed to
The House dealt with Senate amendments or requests so both chambers could settle the bill in the same form. The main amendments were: The introduced and as-passed bill texts differ in 4 observed text blocks, including changes to witness-protection suspension review provisions.
Consideration of Senate message
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Finally passed both Houses
The Governor-General gave Royal AssentThe final step that turns a bill passed by Parliament into an Act of Parliament., turning the bill into an Act.
Key criticism
The main criticism was not that the bill’s overall goals were wrong, but that an omnibus package changing criminal law, national security and prisoner-transfer rules was being passed with too little scrutiny and some safeguards still in dispute. Coalition senators and the Greens still supported the bill, but they warned that automated decision-making, fairness in prisoner-transfer decisions and related human rights protections needed closer review.
No party represented in the debate opposed the bill, but support was qualified by scrutiny and safeguard concerns.
Too little scrutiny for a wide-ranging omnibus bill
Critics argued the bill bundled important changes to criminal law and national security into a largely technical package without enough committee examination, making it harder for parliament to test practical effects and unintended consequences before passage.
Safeguards and fairness in prisoner-transfer and related powers
Some senators warned the international prisoner transfer changes and other operational powers needed stronger safeguards so decisions properly considered welfare, support, services, reasons and review rights, rather than prioritising administrative efficiency over fairness and human rights.
Automated decision-making and operational powers needed monitoring
A narrower concern was that some new administrative or automated decision-making arrangements could create unfair outcomes in practice if not closely watched after commencement, even if the bill was presented as mainly technical.
Further sources
Votes
The bill passed both chambers on the voices. The counted divisions below were about amendments or procedure, not final passage.
House agreed to the bill's third reading on the voices, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes for final passage in that chamber.
Passed on the voices
In a voice vote, members call out Aye or No and the presiding officer judges which side has it. Individual names are only recorded if a formal division is called.
Senate agreed to the bill's third reading on the voices, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes for final passage in that chamber.
Passed on the voices
In a voice vote, members call out Aye or No and the presiding officer judges which side has it. Individual names are only recorded if a formal division is called.
Amendments grouped by chamber. Where APH reports aggregate counts, the package card summarizes the matching public amendment sheets by source theme.
House
The House agreed to the amendments made by the Senate, so the bill could pass both chambers in the same form.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Senate
Defeated 14 to 28. Support came from Greens, Jacqui Lambie Network, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Labor, UAP, and Nationals.
The amendment package was defeated 28-14, so the bill kept the existing transfer decision framework without the proposed added considerations.
The Senate rejected Senator Thorpe's proposal on voices, which would have required the Attorney-General to keep a prisoner or their representative informed about prisoner transfer applications and requests, and to give reasons and review rights after an adverse decision.
Defeated on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
The Senate defeated Senator Thorpe's proposal on voices, which would have required the Attorney-General to keep a prisoner or their representative informed about prisoner transfer applications and requests, and to give reasons and review rights after an adverse decision.
Defeated on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Government amendments would change the bill text to tighten who can make and review witness protection suspension decisions, and to limit delegation and sub-delegation of those powers.
Passed on the voices
The chamber agreed to this amendment package without a counted vote. APH records the agreed count by amendment, while the source documents are grouped into amendment sheets.
These are amendment votes, not the final passage vote on the bill itself. The bill passed both chambers on the voices.
Parliamentary debate
Start here — lead voices
Dreyfus supports the bill, saying it makes minor and technical amendments that improve and clarify how Commonwealth laws operate.
Read in Hansard ↗Shoebridge says the Greens will support the bill through the Senate, but they want amendments on witness protection, prisoner transfers and other safeguards.
Read in Hansard ↗Malarndirri McCarthy supports the bill and says it makes minor and technical changes that improve and clarify the operation of Commonwealth criminal justice, oversight and regulatory laws without expanding powers.
Read in Hansard ↗Fletcher says the coalition will not oppose the bill and supports its intent, but wants it reviewed by the PJCISA parliamentary committee that reviews national security and intelligence laws; speakers said the bill should have been examined by it more closely. because it makes important changes to national security and criminal law without enough scrutiny.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
4 speakers · 4 support
“The Crimes Omnibus Bill 2023 makes minor and technical amendments which will support the proper administration of regulatory, law enforcement, oversight and judicial processes. These changes will improve the everyday operation of government agencies by creating efficiencies and removing doubt and inconsistencies in certain provisions.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Omnibus) Bill 2023 will update, improve and clarify the intended operation of certain provisions in the Crimes Act 1914and other Commonwealth legislation, to support the proper administration of government, law enforcement, oversight and judicial processes.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The bill before us will update, improve and clarify the intended operation of key provisions to support the proper administration of government law enforcement regulatory oversight and judicial processes. This will improve outcomes for non-Commonwealth government stakeholders, such as members of the public who have come in contact with the judicial system, international partners, and state and territory governments. By making small and clarifying amendments, the bill will streamline and enhance the everyday work of government agencies, improving their ability to deliver outcomes for the Australian government.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The bill will update, improve and clarify the intended operation of key provisions to support the proper administration of government, law enforcement, regulatory, oversight and judicial processes.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
3 speakers · 3 support
“I repeat my earlier statement that the coalition are in agreement with the intent of the bill which is before the House. We will not oppose this bill, subject only to the evidence that comes out of a committee inquiry. I do state the principle that senators and members should not be asked to make changes to Australia's national security legislation or important parts of the Crimes Act without a full understanding of the impact of those changes.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“As I said earlier, the coalition agrees with the intent of this bill. We are glad that the bill was scrutinised by the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee. That this bill received such scrutiny is thanks to the vigilance of coalition senators and members. As a rule, we believe that parliamentarians should not be asked to change Australia's criminal or national security legislation without scrutinising the impact of those changes. Of course, where a bill has urgent and important national security implications, we will support the timely passage of appropriate legislation, but this was not one of those cases. We will support the passage of this legislation through the parliament, and I commend the bill to the Senate.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“that it will be proposing amendments to the bill to take into account many of the concerns identified by parliamentary comments.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
1 speaker · 1 support
“A number of those matters will be addressed in the committee process. There are some positive elements in this bill; we don't want to lose sight of those, and the Greens will be supporting the passage of this bill through the Senate. But in relation to the international-transfer-of-prisoner provisions can I say in my concluding comments that we have now seen two high-profile cases: one in the Australian jurisdiction, with Mr Duggan, who was sought to be extradited from Australia to the United States; and one in the case of Julian Assange, who the United States is seeking to extradite from the United Kingdom.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Record
House · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
House · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Referred to Federation Chamber
Referred to Federation Chamber
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading agreed to
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
House · Reported from Federation Chamber
Reported from Federation Chamber
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Third reading agreed to
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Senate · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Senate · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Second reading agreed to
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Senate · Committee of the whole: amendments considered
Amendment packages agreed
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
Senate · Third reading agreed to
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
House · Consideration of Senate message
House agreed to Senate amendments
The House dealt with Senate amendments or requests so both chambers could settle the bill in the same form.
Parliament · Finally passed both Houses
Passed both houses
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Assent · Assent
Assent
The Governor-General gave Royal AssentThe final step that turns a bill passed by Parliament into an Act of Parliament., turning the bill into an Act.
Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (14/06/2023)
Referred to committee
Referred to Committee (10 May 2023): Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (14 June 2023)
APH bill page notes
