This bill became law on Nov 6th, 2023.
Law, justice & rights
Regulations can name State, Territory and some Commonwealth service units as agencies that must share relevant safety information with family courts.
Incomplete and inconsistent information sharing, plus the narrow section 69ZWThe old family law provision that let courts seek limited child safety information before this bill replaced it. process, left family courts without timely safety information and pushed them toward costly, slow subpoenas. The billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. lets courts directly order named agencies to provide broader risk information in child cases, protects reporters’ identities, and reduces duplicate requests.
Before this bill, family courts relied on a limited section 69ZWThe old family law provision that let courts seek limited child safety information before this bill replaced it. process, informal exchanges and subpoenas, even though governments had already tried to improve coordination through co-located state and territory family safety officials in 2019-20. After the Australian Law Reform CommissionThe law reform body whose 2019 report helped drive the push for broader information sharing.’s 2019 report and a 2021 parliamentary recommendation pushed for a national information-sharing framework, the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. was introduced in 2023 to let courts directly obtain broader risk information, protect reporters’ identities and cut duplicate requests, then became law in November 2023.
The main criticism was that the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety.’s information-sharing measures were bundled with broader family law changes that critics said were rushed, insufficiently tested and likely to create unintended consequences, including weaker shared-parenting principles and more stressful or costly disputes. Those objections were raised mainly by Coalition senators, many of whom said they supported the information-sharing parts but not the wider package as drafted.
Mark Dreyfus MP introduced this bill. It passed with support from Greens, Liberal Party, Labor, Jacqui Lambie Network, some crossbench members; opposed by UAP, One Nation.
Did it become law?
Yes
Became law 06 Nov 2023
Final passage
Recorded final vote
1 counted final-passage vote was recorded.
Passage speed
222 days
From introduction to the latest recorded parliamentary step
Meaning
Regulations can name State, Territory and some Commonwealth service units as agencies that must share relevant safety information with family courts.
Family courts can order those agencies to give the court documents and information during child-related cases.
The new orders can cover suspected child abuse, neglect or family violence, not just harm that has already been confirmed.
Courts must keep confidential the identity of people who report suspected child abuse or family violence, unless a legal exception applies.
If the court has already ordered an agency to provide documents or information, a party needs the court's permission before issuing a subpoenaA legal demand for documents or information, which the bill tries to limit when the court already has an order for the same material. to that agency in the same case.
If the regulations prescribe an agency of a State or Territory, a part of such an agency, or a part of a Commonwealth agency that provides services on behalf of a State or Territory, for the purposes of this section, the prescribed agency, or prescribed part, is an information sharing agency.Family Law Amendment (Information Sharing) Act 2023 final Act text
(1) The court may make an order, in child‑related proceedings, requiring an information sharing agency to produce to the court any documents, and give the court any information, in the agency’s possession or control relating to a matter mentioned in subsection (2).Family Law Amendment (Information Sharing) Act 2023 final Act text
(a) abuse, neglect or family violence to which a child to whom the proceedings relate has been, or is suspected to have been, subjected or exposed;Family Law Amendment (Information Sharing) Act 2023 final Act text
the court must not disclose the identity of the person (the notifier) who made the notification, or information that could identify the notifier, unless subsection (3) applies.Family Law Amendment (Information Sharing) Act 2023 final Act text
If an order has been made under section 67ZBE in the course of child‑related proceedings requiring an information sharing agency to provide documents or information, a party to those proceedings must not, without the court’s permission, request the issue of a subpoena requiring that agency to provide documents or information in relation to those proceedings.Family Law Amendment (Information Sharing) Act 2023 final Act text
Context
Before this bill, family courts relied on a limited section 69ZWThe old family law provision that let courts seek limited child safety information before this bill replaced it. process, informal exchanges and subpoenas, even though governments had already tried to improve coordination through co-located state and territory family safety officials in 2019-20. After the Australian Law Reform CommissionThe law reform body whose 2019 report helped drive the push for broader information sharing.’s 2019 report and a 2021 parliamentary recommendation pushed for a national information-sharing framework, the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. was introduced in 2023 to let courts directly obtain broader risk information, protect reporters’ identities and cut duplicate requests, then became law in November 2023.
Australian Law Reform CommissionThe law reform body whose 2019 report helped drive the push for broader information sharing. calls for a national information-sharing framework
Parliamentary debate on the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. said the reform followed the Australian Law Reform CommissionThe law reform body whose 2019 report helped drive the push for broader information sharing.'s 2019 family law report, which recommended a national approach to information sharing.
Hansard ↗Budget funds co-located family safety officials in family law courts
The 2019-20 budget provided funding to place state and territory family safety officials in family law courts to improve information sharing across family law, family violence and child protection systems.
Hansard ↗Parliamentary committee recommends stronger family law information sharing
The explanatory memorandum says the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. responds specifically to Recommendation 14 of the Joint Select Committee on Australia's Family Law SystemA parliamentary committee whose second interim report recommended stronger family law information sharing. Second Interim Report.
Family Law Amendment (Information Sharing) explanatory memorandum ↗Government introduces the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. to widen court access to safety information
The billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. was introduced with the stated aim of operationalising the National Strategic FrameworkThe policy framework this bill was designed to put into practice by making agencies share safety information with family courts. and giving family law courts better access to information about family violence, child abuse and neglect risks.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Parliament passes the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety.
Both houses passed the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. in the same form, clearing the way for the new court-led information sharing scheme and limits on duplicate subpoenas.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Royal AssentThe final step that turns a passed bill into an Act of Parliament. makes the information-sharing reforms law
Royal AssentThe final step that turns a passed bill into an Act of Parliament. turned the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. into an Act, formally establishing the legislative basis for broader agency disclosures to family courts in child-related cases.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Legislative route
The billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. 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 billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety.'s purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
The billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Referred to Federation Chamber
The billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The chamber agreed to the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. at second reading, meaning it accepted the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
The billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Reported from Federation Chamber
The chamber agreed to the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber. Later message exchanges with the other chamber were still recorded afterwards.
Third reading agreed to
Referred to Committee (11/05/2023): Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (14/06/2023)
Referred to committee
APH bill page notesThe billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. 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 billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety.'s purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
The billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The chamber agreed to the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. at second reading, meaning it accepted the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
The billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Recorded vote: 38 to 3.
The chamber considered amendments before the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. moved to the next stage.
Third reading agreed to :
The House dealt with Senate amendments or requests so both chambers could settle the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. in the same form. The main amendments were: The introduced and as-passed bill texts differ in 5 observed text blocks, including review timing and suspected abuse wording.
Consideration of Senate message
Both houses passed the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Finally passed both Houses
The Governor-General gave Royal AssentThe final step that turns a passed bill into an Act of Parliament., turning the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. into an Act.
Key criticism
The main criticism was that the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety.’s information-sharing measures were bundled with broader family law changes that critics said were rushed, insufficiently tested and likely to create unintended consequences, including weaker shared-parenting principles and more stressful or costly disputes. Those objections were raised mainly by Coalition senators, many of whom said they supported the information-sharing parts but not the wider package as drafted.
Criticism focused mostly on the wider package, not on the core information-sharing idea itself.
Bundled with broader contested reforms
Critics said the information-sharing measures were being packaged with wider family law changes that had not been properly tested or consulted on, making it harder to support the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. as a whole.
Risk of weakening shared-parenting principles
Some opponents argued the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. would go too far by removing or cutting back existing shared-parenting and parental-responsibility principles, which they said could worsen outcomes for families and children.
Unintended cost and stress in disputes
Several speakers warned that, beyond its core information-sharing changes, the wider reform package could make family law disputes more complex, costly and stressful instead of simplifying the system.
Further sources
Votes
The chamber-passage votes come first. Expand a vote to see the party breakdown.
House agreed to the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety.'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.
Passed 38 to 3. Support came from Greens, Liberal Party, Labor, Jacqui Lambie Network, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from UAP and One Nation.
Amendments grouped by chamber. These cards include amendment outcomes recorded without a counted division.
House
The House agreed to the amendments made by the Senate, so the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. 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
The Senate agreed on voices to the Government amendment package for this bill, including review and suspected-abuse wording changes.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
The Senate agreed on voices to a second-reading amendment calling for family violence training for people involved in the information-sharing scheme.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
These are votes on the bill itself rather than amendment votes.
Parliamentary debate
Start here — lead voices
Dreyfus strongly supports the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety., saying it is a significant reform that will close gaps between the family law, child protection and family violence systems so courts can get relevant risk information sooner.
Read in Hansard ↗Chandler says the coalition will not support the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. because, although it welcomes some information-sharing measures, the wider changes are untested, not well supported by stakeholders, and risk making family law outcomes worse for children and families.
Read in Hansard ↗Paterson says the coalition welcomes the information-sharing bill, although its main criticisms are directed at the companion bill's broader family law changes.
Read in Hansard ↗Tyrrell supports the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. and says it will put children at the centre of family law decisions by replacing shared parental responsibility with a best-interests test.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
6 speakers · 7 contributions · 6 support
“The Family Law Amendment (Information Sharing) Bill 2023 is a significant step to ensure that children and families do not fall between the gaps of the federal family law system, and the State and Territory family violence and child protection systems.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The Family Law Amendment (Information Sharing) Bill 2023 is a significant step to ensure that children and families do not fall between the gaps of the federal family law system, and the state and territory family violence and child protection systems.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Nita Green on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Nita Green supports the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. and says it will make family law simpler, safer and more focused on children's best interests, especially for people affected by family violence. She says the reforms are long overdue and help correct a confusing system that has caused harm and unnecessary conflict.
“I rise to make a contribution in support of the Family Law Amendment Bill 2023 and the associated bill, and I do so in my capacity as Chair of the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee. I joined with my colleagues to inquire into and report to the Senate on this legislation.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Green supports the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety., saying it will remove confusing family law wording, better protect children and victims of family violence, and make the system more streamlined. She argues the changes are needed because the current rules can be misunderstood and can leave families exposed to unsafe arrangements.
“Many of these changes seek to keep those kids safer, to make sure that our family law system is setting a standard we can rely on and build on to make sure that all children's interests are considered in the court system. That's what these changes seek to do, and anyone suggesting otherwise has not engaged with the content of this bill or the experts that say that that is what the bill does.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“This legislation might sound esoteric and legalistic but it will have a very discernible, practical impact to help the welfare and best interests of children. That's what we should be doing in this parliament. I commend the Attorney-General for bringing this legislation to the chamber. It is small. It is not a big piece of legislation that's going through. But it will appreciably improve our family law system and give a full range of risk-averse information held by state and territory child protection agencies of the court in the federal sphere. I think it's really good legislation and I'm pleased to support it.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The bill improves the family law system's ability to protect children and victim-survivors by ensuring all information is available to identify, assess and respond to family violence, child abuse and neglect risk.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The needs of every child are unique. The Family Law Amendment Bill and the Family Law Amendment (Information Sharing) Bill will ensure all children involved in the family law system have their needs met as effectively and safely as possible. I encourage the Senate to support these bills.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
17 speakers · 18 contributions · 6 support · 6 oppose · 5 mixed
“The coalition welcomes a number of measures that are in these bills, and in particular in the information-sharing bill, but we are concerned that in the Family Law Amendment Bill there are issues which are right to be recognised but the solutions are either untested, unproven, uncertain and could have unintended consequences or, in the view of the coalition, go too far.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Just in summary: many of the changes in the family law amendment bills that we're debating here today were made with good intentions; we recognise that, we support some of the changes that are in the bills and we join with the government in recognising that many of the issues that these bills seek to address are problems that need a solution. Like I said, I spent a lot of time on the family law committee in the last parliament and I don't think that anybody in this place would think that our family law system is perfect. But in too many places the proposals that are being put forward by the government in these bills do not align with those problems. They go beyond recommendations made by previous reviews, they aren't supported by the legal profession, they have unintended consequences and, in many cases, they haven't been road tested on the ground. The coalition's very real concern is that although we join with the government in recognising these problems, the solutions in these bills are actually going to make things worse for Australian families. We cannot afford for our family law system to make things worse for Australian families. As I said in my very first moments of this contribution, that's something that we, as legislators, should be very cautious about, particularly when we're dealing with a system that's meant to guide families through some of the most difficult parts of their lives.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Ultimately the opposition welcomes the Family Law Amendment (Information Sharing) Bill. It is the culmination of work that started under the former coalition government to ensure that family courts have the information they need when making orders in parenting matters.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Let's now look at the approach that the government has taken in this bill. What we have is the work has been done, the recommendations are clear that the presumption should be reformed and clarified, and the coalition agrees with that. But Labor's approach in this bill goes that much further. They want to repeal the presumption entirely. It is illuminating that when he consulted on the exposure draft of the bill, the Attorney-General, in typical style, never bothered to ask whether or not the presumption should be retained. He treated repeal as a given yet that is not what the body of evidence is in the presumption. The independent, impartial and expert recommendation of the ALRC, under this Attorney-General, never actually had a chance.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Firstly, I'll go to the good news, the part where our support is very clearly on the record and unqualified, and that is in relation to the Family Law Amendment (Information Sharing) Bill. We welcome this bill. It's a culmination of work that was started under the previous government to ensure that family courts have the information they need when making orders in relation to parenting matters.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“As the shadow attorney-general, Senator Cash, has already indicated, some of what has been proposed in these bills is welcome and certainly needed, particularly when it comes to the second of the bills before us—the Family Law Amendment (Information Sharing) Bill. But we need to recognise that just because these proposals are put forward, it doesn't mean that they're the right solutions, and that is where the concerns of the opposition arise.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“There is so much evidence here in Australia and overseas that this presumption is in a child's best interests, all things being equal—obviously not in situations of violence et cetera, but, even in the laws that were put in place under the Howard government, things like domestic violence and the potential for harm to a child were grounds to not have that equality. So, whilst I'm supportive of the view that we should refine expectations about equal responsibility, which doesn't necessarily mean equal time, what this legislation does is to overreach and go too far. There are many submissions—including from Professor Smyth, the Family Law Practitioners Association of Western Australia, the Hunter Valley Family Law Practitioners Association and the Family Law Practitioners Association of Queensland—highlighting in reasonably lengthy ways their concerns with the fact that this presumption is being removed, and that is something that I do not support.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Some of my colleagues have already articulated that there are a number of measures in these bills that are very welcome, particularly in the information-sharing bill. Many of the bills we have seen come through this place in the last nearly 18 months from the Labor Party had been done without sufficient consultation and, even where consultation was done and Senate committees were given an appropriate amount of time to reflect on the bills that came before this place and how to improve them, the Labor Party simply dismissed and discarded those concerns.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Family law is complex. Above all, it directly impacts families, which are, as I said, the very fabric of our society. Every year, tens of thousands of Australians find themselves going through the pain and sadness of separation. Some of the measures in these bills, in particular the second bill that we're dealing with, which is the information sharing bill, are welcome. But in many areas, especially the Family Law Amendment Bill, we recognise that there are serious issues, and the solutions proposed, frankly, go too far or are untested. And so, when we're passing law, particularly in this area, we must be very careful.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I think there is good intention being displayed in relation to these bills, but it is clear that they need more work. There are some holes here, and these must be addressed before they become law. They must be addressed by us here before they impact any more children unnecessarily.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The coalition's very real concern, though, is that although we join with the government in recognising the problems, many of the solutions presented in the bill remain untested and may make things worse for Australian families.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I acknowledge the sector contribution that has gone into informing the Family Law Amendment (Information Sharing) Bill. A lot of their work has contributed to this bill. This bill does make sense. This bill is a welcome development.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We as a coalition are extremely concerned about provisions of the bill that significantly cut the objects and principles of the parenting framework in the act.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The Family Law Amendment Bill and the Family Law Amendment (Information Sharing) Bill contain measures that the coalition unquestionably supports wholeheartedly, most particularly the provisions that are contained in the information-sharing bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise to speak on the Family Law Amendment (Information Sharing) Bill 2023. The coalition welcomes this bill. It is the culmination of work started under the former coalition government to ensure that family courts have the information they need when making orders in parenting matters.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“In the few minutes left to me this evening, I will go briefly to equal shared parental responsibility. I do fear that Labor's changes in this area have the risk of creating some uncertainty, potentially muddying the waters, and go further than the ALRC recommendation in this area.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
2 speakers · 2 support
“I rise to speak on the Family Law Amendment Bill 2023 and the Family Law Amendment (Information Sharing) Bill 2023, and I note at the outset that the Greens will be supporting both of these bills.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“These bills and these changes are long overdue and provide much-needed modernisation to this legal framework. Of course there's still a lot of work to be done in the family courts but this is a step in the right direction.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
1 speaker · 1 support
“The Family Law Amendment Bill makes a number of changes to the Family Law Act. Perhaps most importantly, it replaces the presumption of shared parental responsibility with a new paramount consideration for resolving family law disputes: the best interests of the child. I support this bill. The information sharing bill also makes changes to how information about family violence, child abuse and neglect is shared between state, territory and federal authorities and the courts. I also support this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Record
House · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. 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 billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety.'s purpose and principles.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Referred to Federation Chamber
Referred to Federation Chamber
The billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading agreed to
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. at second reading, meaning it accepted the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. in principle and allowed it to continue.
House · Reported from Federation Chamber
Reported from Federation Chamber
The billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Third reading agreed to
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Senate · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. 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 billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety.'s purpose and principles.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Second reading agreed to
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. at second reading, meaning it accepted the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. in principle and allowed it to continue.
Senate · Committee of the Whole debate
Committee of the Whole debate
The billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Committee of the Whole debate
Committee of the Whole debate
The billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Amendments considered
Recorded vote: 38 to 3.
Amendment packages agreed
The chamber considered amendments before the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. moved to the next stage.
House · Consideration of Senate message
House agreed to Senate amendments
The House dealt with Senate amendments or requests so both chambers could settle the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. in the same form.
Parliament · Finally passed both Houses
Passed both houses
Both houses passed the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Assent · Assent
Assent
The Governor-General gave Royal AssentThe final step that turns a passed bill into an Act of Parliament., turning the billThe bill that created the new court-led information sharing rules for family law cases involving child safety. into an Act.
Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (14/06/2023)
Referred to committee
Referred to Committee (11 May 2023): Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (14 June 2023)
APH bill page notes
