← Back to home Browse all bills

Defence Legislation Amendment (Naval Nuclear Propulsion)

Current status

This bill became law on Jul 3rd, 2023.

Policy area

Defence & foreign affairs

What does this bill do?

Australia keeps its ban on civil nuclear power, but the law now makes clear that this ban does not stop nuclear-powered submarine projects from being assessed and regulated.

Why was it introduced?

Australia’s civil nuclear power banAustralia's ban on civilian nuclear power plants, which the bill says stays in place and is not being lifted. left ARPANSAThe federal safety regulator that can now issue licences for submarine nuclear propulsion work under this bill. and the Environment Minister unable to clearly license, assess or approve activities for nuclear-powered submarines. The bill clarifies that those regulators can make the needed submarine-related decisions without changing the ban on civil nuclear power.

Broader context

Australia had long banned civil nuclear power, but after AUKUSThe security partnership that committed Australia to acquiring nuclear-powered submarines, creating the need for this legal change. committed the country to acquiring conventionally armed nuclear-powered submarines, that same legal barrier left regulators without clear authority to license and approve key submarine-related facilities and activities. As the 2023 Defence Strategic ReviewA government defence review whose response made nuclear-powered submarines a top priority and helped drive the bill. response made nuclear-powered submarines a top defence priority, the bill was introduced as the first legislative step to clear those obstacles, and its passage in June and assent in July 2023 enabled ARPANSAThe federal safety regulator that can now issue licences for submarine nuclear propulsion work under this bill. and the Environment Minister to make the necessary decisions without lifting the civil nuclear ban.

Key criticism

The main criticism was that the bill opened the door to a broader nuclear-submarine program with environmental, health, security and sovereignty risks, while also weakening scrutiny by rushing the inquiry and limiting consultation. That case was raised through the Greens second-reading amendmentAn amendment moved during the bill's second-reading stage to change the chamber's formal position or add a statement to the debate. rather than through a standalone speech by Senator Andrew McLachlan.

Who supported it?

Richard Marles MP introduced this bill. It passed on the voices.

Introduced in House 10 May 2023
Passed House 25 May 2023
Passed Senate 22 June 2023
Became law 03 July 2023

Did it become law?

Yes

Became law 03 July 2023

Final passage

Passed without a counted vote

Members called out ‘aye’ or ‘no’ — no individual votes were recorded.

Passage speed

54 days

From introduction to the latest recorded parliamentary step

Official record

View on APH

Parliament of Australia bill page

Meaning

What does this bill do?

  1. Australia keeps its ban on civil nuclear power, but the law now makes clear that this ban does not stop nuclear-powered submarine projects from being assessed and regulated.

  2. The Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety AgencyThe federal safety regulator that can now issue licences for submarine nuclear propulsion work under this bill. can issue facility licences needed for work involving the submarine nuclear propulsion system, where the old nuclear installationA type of nuclear facility, such as a power plant or fuel-processing site, that the old law barred regulators from approving in this context. ban might otherwise have blocked that.

  3. The Environment Minister can make formal declarations for actions involving the submarine nuclear propulsion system, instead of being blocked by the old ban on certain nuclear installations.

  4. The Environment Minister can approve individual submarine-related actions involving the nuclear propulsion system, including construction or operation, despite the previous nuclear installationA type of nuclear facility, such as a power plant or fuel-processing site, that the old law barred regulators from approving in this context. restriction.

  5. The Environment Minister can also approve broader plans or groups of actions, and make conservation agreements, when they relate to the submarine nuclear propulsion system.

Show source excerpts
  1. The purpose of the Defence Legislation Amendment (Naval Nuclear Propulsion) Bill 2023 (the Bill) is to clarify that the current moratorium on civil nuclear power does not prevent the relevant regulators (the CEO of the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) and the Minister for the Environment and Water) from exercising their regulatory powers and performing functions in respect of conventionally-armed, nuclear-powered submarines.
    Defence Legislation Amendment (Naval Nuclear Propulsion) explanatory memorandum
  2. The effect of these amendments is to clarify that the CEO of ARPANSA is not prevented from issuing a facility licence under section 32 that may be required to authorise activities mentioned in subsection 30(1) that may involve a naval nuclear propulsion plant related to use in a conventionally-armed, nuclear-powered submarine.
    Defence Legislation Amendment (Naval Nuclear Propulsion) explanatory memorandum
  3. The effect of this amendment is to clarify that the Minister is not prevented from issuing a declaration for an action, consisting of, or involving the construction or operation of a naval nuclear propulsion plant related to use in a conventionally-armed, nuclear-powered submarine.
    Defence Legislation Amendment (Naval Nuclear Propulsion) explanatory memorandum
  4. The effect of this amendment is to clarify that the Minister is not prevented from approving an action, consisting of, or involving the construction or operation of naval nuclear propulsion plant related to use in a conventionally-armed, nuclear‑powered submarine.
    Defence Legislation Amendment (Naval Nuclear Propulsion) explanatory memorandum
  5. The effect of this amendment is to clarify that the Minister is not prevented from approving an action, or a class of actions, in accordance with an endorsed policy, plan or program, if the action, or an action in the class of actions, consists of, or involves the construction or operation of, a naval nuclear propulsion plant related to use in a conventionally armed, nuclear‑powered submarine.
    Defence Legislation Amendment (Naval Nuclear Propulsion) explanatory memorandum

Context

Broader context for this bill

Australia had long banned civil nuclear power, but after AUKUSThe security partnership that committed Australia to acquiring nuclear-powered submarines, creating the need for this legal change. committed the country to acquiring conventionally armed nuclear-powered submarines, that same legal barrier left regulators without clear authority to license and approve key submarine-related facilities and activities. As the 2023 Defence Strategic ReviewA government defence review whose response made nuclear-powered submarines a top priority and helped drive the bill. response made nuclear-powered submarines a top defence priority, the bill was introduced as the first legislative step to clear those obstacles, and its passage in June and assent in July 2023 enabled ARPANSAThe federal safety regulator that can now issue licences for submarine nuclear propulsion work under this bill. and the Environment Minister to make the necessary decisions without lifting the civil nuclear ban.

  1. September 2021

    AUKUSThe security partnership that committed Australia to acquiring nuclear-powered submarines, creating the need for this legal change. commits Australia to nuclear-powered submarines

    The AUKUSThe security partnership that committed Australia to acquiring nuclear-powered submarines, creating the need for this legal change. partnership set Australia on the path to owning conventionally armed nuclear-powered submarines, creating a need for domestic laws that could support that capability.

    Hansard ↗
  2. April 2023

    Defence Strategic ReviewA government defence review whose response made nuclear-powered submarines a top priority and helped drive the bill. response makes submarine capability a first priority

    The government's response to the Defence Strategic ReviewA government defence review whose response made nuclear-powered submarines a top priority and helped drive the bill. identified conventionally armed nuclear-powered submarines as its first priority area, sharpening the need to remove legal blockers to regulation and site preparation.

    Hansard ↗
  3. 10 May 2023

    Government introduces the bill as the first legislative step

    The Defence Minister presented the bill as the first legislative step for Australia's submarine program, aimed at clarifying that existing civil nuclear prohibitions did not stop required regulatory decisions.

    Hansard ↗
  4. 22 June 2023

    Parliament passes the bill

    Both houses passed the bill in the same form, clearing the way for ARPANSAThe federal safety regulator that can now issue licences for submarine nuclear propulsion work under this bill. and the Environment Minister to assess and approve submarine-related activities despite the old nuclear installationA type of nuclear facility, such as a power plant or fuel-processing site, that the old law barred regulators from approving in this context. ban.

    Parliamentary timeline ↗
  5. 03 July 2023

    Royal AssentThe final step that turns a passed bill into an Act of Parliament. turns the bill into law

    Royal AssentThe final step that turns a passed bill into an Act of Parliament. completed the change, allowing the submarine program to proceed under Australia's existing civil nuclear ban rather than overturning it.

    Parliamentary timeline ↗

Legislative route

How did it move through Parliament?

House Senate
Introduced 10 May 2023

The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.

Introduced and read a first time

Second reading opened 10 May 2023

A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.

Second reading moved

Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee; Committee report (09/06/2023) review 11 May 2023

Referred to Committee (11/05/2023): Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee; Committee report (09/06/2023)

Referred to committee

APH bill page notes
Second reading debate 23 May 2023

The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.

Sent to Federation Chamber for debate 23 May 2023

The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.

Referred to Federation Chamber

Second reading debate 24 May 2023

The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.

House second reading agreed 24 May 2023

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

Returned from Federation Chamber 25 May 2023

The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.

Reported from Federation Chamber

House third reading agreed 25 May 2023

The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.

Third reading agreed to

Introduced 13 June 2023

The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.

Introduced and read a first time

Second reading opened 13 June 2023

A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.

Second reading moved

Senate second reading agreed 22 June 2023

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

Senate third reading agreed 22 June 2023

The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.

Third reading agreed to

Passed both houses 22 June 2023

Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.

Finally passed both Houses

Assent 03 July 2023

The Governor-General gave Royal AssentThe final step that turns a passed bill into an Act of Parliament., turning the bill into an Act.

Key criticism

The main case against this bill

The main criticism was that the bill opened the door to a broader nuclear-submarine program with environmental, health, security and sovereignty risks, while also weakening scrutiny by rushing the inquiry and limiting consultation. That case was raised through the Greens second-reading amendmentAn amendment moved during the bill's second-reading stage to change the chamber's formal position or add a statement to the debate. rather than through a standalone speech by Senator Andrew McLachlan.

Criticism was real but narrow, and focused more on the wider AUKUSThe security partnership that committed Australia to acquiring nuclear-powered submarines, creating the need for this legal change. program and scrutiny process than this bill’s mechanics alone.

Step toward a larger nuclear program

Critics argued the bill was not just a technical fix but the first legislative step toward a much bigger nuclear-powered submarine program that could bring environmental, health, security and sovereignty risks.

Raised by Australian Greens senators, through the second-reading amendment Source ↗

Rushed scrutiny and limited consultation

Critics said the parliamentary inquiry moved too quickly and did not allow enough consultation, scrutiny or public hearings for a bill linked to a major long-term defence and nuclear project.

Raised by Australian Greens senators and Greens amendment movers Source ↗

Further sources

parlinfo.aph.gov.au ↗ openaustralia.org.au ↗

Votes

Recorded votes

How the bill itself passed

The bill passed both chambers on the voices, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes for final passage.

Passed

House passed the bill

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.

25 May 2023

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

Senate passed the bill

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.

22 June 2023

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 at a glance

Amendments grouped by chamber. These cards include amendment outcomes recorded without a counted division.

Senate

Defeated

Oppose nuclear-powered submarines

The Senate rejected Shoebridge and Steele-John's second-reading amendmentAn amendment moved during the bill's second-reading stage to change the chamber's formal position or add a statement to the debate. on voices; it would have added a statement noting the risks, lack of consultation and opposition to the bill as the first legislative step toward Australia’s nuclear-powered submarines.

Defeated on voices

The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.

Hansard record ↗

Defeated

Nuclear submarine criticism rejected

The Senate Journal records this outcome as defeated on voices.

Defeated on voices

The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.

Hansard record ↗

Parliamentary debate

Who spoke, and what they said

Start here — lead voices

Sponsor speech Supports

Richard Marles

Australian Labor Party • MP 10 May 2023

Marles supports the bill and says it is a necessary first step to create the legal framework for Australia’s conventionally armed nuclear-powered submarines.

Read in Hansard ↗
Lead supporting voice Supports

Keith Pitt

National Party • MP 24 May 2023

Keith Pitt says the coalition will support the bill because AUKUSThe security partnership that committed Australia to acquiring nuclear-powered submarines, creating the need for this legal change. and nuclear-powered submarines are the right national security decision.

Read in Hansard ↗
Lead voice Supports

Luke Howarth

Liberal Party • MP 24 May 2023

Howarth says the coalition supports the bill and wants it to pass because it advances Australia’s AUKUSThe security partnership that committed Australia to acquiring nuclear-powered submarines, creating the need for this legal change. nuclear-powered submarine capability.

Read in Hansard ↗
Lead voice Supports

David Gillespie

National Party • MP 24 May 2023

Gillespie supports the bill and says it is needed to make AUKUSThe security partnership that committed Australia to acquiring nuclear-powered submarines, creating the need for this legal change. nuclear-powered submarines workable by changing outdated legal barriers and setting up the right regulatory path.

Read in Hansard ↗

All speeches by bloc

Labor

2 speakers · 2 support

  1. Richard Marles ★ Marles supports the bill and says it is a necessary first step to create the legal framework for Australia’s conventionally armed nuclear-powered submarines.
    “This bill is a modest and necessary first legislative step towards Australia acquiring conventionally armed nuclear-powered submarines.”

    Australian Labor Party • MP • 10 May 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  2. Matt Thistlethwaite Thistlethwaite says Labor supports the bill as an important first step toward Australia’s conventionally armed nuclear-powered submarine capability, and says it will let existing regulators do their jobs if needed.
    “The bill clarifies that the moratorium on civil nuclear power, as described under the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Act and the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, does not apply to conventionally armed nuclear powered submarines. The amendments made by this bill will enable existing regulators to perform their functions and duties, if and when called upon, in support of Australia's acquisition of conventionally armed nuclear powered submarines and their supporting infrastructure.”

    Australian Labor Party • MP • 24 May 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗

Coalition

8 speakers · 8 support

  1. Keith Pitt ★ Keith Pitt says the coalition will support the bill because AUKUSThe security partnership that committed Australia to acquiring nuclear-powered submarines, creating the need for this legal change. and nuclear-powered submarines are the right national security decision.
    “I will go back to where I started. The coalition supports this legislation. The coalition supports the AUKUS agreement. It is one that we struck. It is the right decision for our nation. It is the right decision for our national security. But not using this technology for the benefit of all Australia is the wrong decision.”

    National Party • MP • 24 May 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  2. Luke Howarth ★ Howarth says the coalition supports the bill and wants it to pass because it advances Australia’s AUKUSThe security partnership that committed Australia to acquiring nuclear-powered submarines, creating the need for this legal change. nuclear-powered submarine capability.
    “The capability of the AUKUS nuclear powered submarines will change the face of our naval fleet, with considerable performance advantages over conventional submarines. This multigenerational legacy project will not only deliver enhanced defence capabilities; it has the potential to boost defence industry innovation, manufacturing and jobs around Australia.”

    Liberal Party • MP • 24 May 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  3. David Gillespie ★ Gillespie supports the bill and says it is needed to make AUKUSThe security partnership that committed Australia to acquiring nuclear-powered submarines, creating the need for this legal change. nuclear-powered submarines workable by changing outdated legal barriers and setting up the right regulatory path.
    “The Defence Legislation Amendment (Naval Nuclear Propulsion) Bill 2023 is a very important bill and it has my full support. It makes amendments to the ARPANS Act and the EPBC Act. Why is this being done? People in my electorate and around the country want to know what this is all about. Basically, we have agreed to become owner-operators of nuclear-powered conventionally armed submarines. That triggered the need for a lot of new regulatory processes. Those which are currently in place prevent any nuclear power plants operating in this country. So the bill amends these two acts which have specific provisions preventing the building and construction of a nuclear power plant, a nuclear enrichment plant, a fabrication plant and a reprocessing plant.”

    National Party • MP • 24 May 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  4. James Stevens James Stevens supports the bill and says it is needed to make the first AUKUSThe security partnership that committed Australia to acquiring nuclear-powered submarines, creating the need for this legal change. nuclear submarine changes work, because the legislative amendments will help Australia build and sustain a sovereign submarine capability.
    “This bill is about providing the legislative change that is necessary to accommodate the first stages of this AUKUS opportunity. We know that dramatic upgrades in Western Australia are necessary to sustain nuclear powered submarines that will be on rotation from the United States and the United Kingdom while we work through the ultimate objective of the Royal Australian Navy. That objective is acquiring submarines and, most importantly to me as an Adelaide MP, having submarines that we build in Australia. In Adelaide they will be built at the Osborne shipyard complex. It is important that we build them here and sustain them here so we have a sovereign capability that underpins our ability to defend ourselves without relying on anyone else. We all understand that a lot of other legislation will need to be considered into the future to allow us to achieve that potential. It's very important that as a parliament we appropriately scrutinise but also move at an appropriate pace through those changes so that this capability is in no way delayed for the Royal Australian Navy, in the interests of defending our nation. Moving this bill through the parliament is something we very much support and will be as cooperative as possible on.”

    Liberal Party • MP • 24 May 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  5. Ted O'Brien Ted O'Brien says the coalition will back the bill so Australia can move quickly on AUKUSThe security partnership that committed Australia to acquiring nuclear-powered submarines, creating the need for this legal change. nuclear submarines, because the amendments are needed to let regulators act without litigation risk.
    “So it should come as no surprise that the coalition is offering bipartisan support for this bill, and I join with my colleagues, including the shadow minister for defence, in calling on all members of this legislature to support this bill and to do so on one simple premise: that it's in our country's best interest.”

    Liberal Party • MP • 24 May 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  6. Andrew Wallace Andrew Wallace supports the bill and says it is needed to let Australia prepare for AUKUSThe security partnership that committed Australia to acquiring nuclear-powered submarines, creating the need for this legal change. nuclear-powered submarines and strengthen national defence.
    “This bill will enable us to do the preparatory work. It will enable ARPANSA to perform its vital work as the nuclear regulator in the initial stages of getting these AUKUS boats into the water. There's a lot of water to go under the bridge, if you'll pardon the pun, but we have to start. There is no time like the present. There is a great degree of urgency. The Collins-class submarines, as effective as they are, are not getting any younger. We need to replace them, and this is a massive, massive project—a project that is like a moonshot for Australia.”

    Liberal National Party • MP • 24 May 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  7. Andrew Hastie Andrew Hastie says the coalition will support the bill unamended because it is a necessary first step in building the regulatory framework for Australia’s nuclear submarines and advancing AUKUSThe security partnership that committed Australia to acquiring nuclear-powered submarines, creating the need for this legal change..
    “Speed is of the essence, so we support this bill unamended as we see this bill as vital to the national interests and our long-term defence capability.”

    Liberal Party • MP • 23 May 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  8. Jenny Ware Jenny Ware supports the bill and says it is in the nation's best interests because it is a necessary first step for AUKUSThe security partnership that committed Australia to acquiring nuclear-powered submarines, creating the need for this legal change. and Australia's nuclear-powered submarine capability.
    “This bill is in the nation's best interests. It concerns the future of our national security and reflects the AUKUS partnership. The one issue that has been raised clearly is the issue of nuclear waste. The AUKUS nuclear power submarine pathway, in its recent report, said:”

    Liberal Party • MP • 24 May 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗

Record

Full record

Full chat