This bill became law on Dec 14th, 2023.
Law, justice & rights
Australia now has a legal basis for federal identity-checking systems, including document checks, face checks and the National Driver Licence Facial Recognition SolutionThe part of the system that lets face checks be run against state and territory driver licence records. that uses state and territory records.
Existing federal identity-checking systems, including document checks, face checks and the national driver licence facial recognition system, lacked a clear legal basis. The bill creates that legal framework and lets approved agencies and organisations use the services under consent, privacy, access and oversight rules.
Before this bill, the Commonwealth was already running identity-checking systems such as the Document Verification ServiceThe system that checks a person's identity details, such as name or date of birth, against government records., Face Verification ServiceThe system that compares a person's photo or facial image with an official identity record to confirm they match. and the national driver licence facial recognition system, and they were being used at very large scale by government and businesses even though speakers said they lacked a clear statutory footing. The bill responded by putting those existing services on a legal basis with consent, privacy, access and oversight rules, and after Parliament passed it in December 2023 the framework became law through Royal AssentThe final step that turns the bill into Commonwealth law after Parliament has passed it..
The main criticism was that the bill moved ahead before privacy protections, consultation and scrutiny were strong enough, creating risks around bundled consent, cross-jurisdiction data sharing and unclear operational impacts. Those concerns were raised most clearly by the Coalition and Greens, while some broader surveillance warnings came from crossbench opponents and support later became more conditional after amendments.
Mark Dreyfus MP introduced this bill. It passed with support from Labor, Centre Alliance, some crossbench members; opposed by Liberal Party, Nationals, Greens, some crossbench members.
Did it become law?
Yes
Became law 14 Dec 2023
Final passage
Recorded final vote
1 counted final-passage vote was recorded.
Passage speed
92 days
From introduction to the latest recorded parliamentary step
Meaning
Australia now has a legal basis for federal identity-checking systems, including document checks, face checks and the National Driver Licence Facial Recognition SolutionThe part of the system that lets face checks be run against state and territory driver licence records. that uses state and territory records.
Government agencies, businesses and other organisations can only use these identity-checking services if they are covered by agreements with privacy safeguards, and only approved data suppliers can provide the records being checked.
People usually must give express consent before their information is collected, used or shared for an identity check, unless a government authority is authorised by another law to do so.
Face-searching across many records is limited to protecting undercover officers, protected witnesses and similar people, and it cannot be used for broader law enforcement or intelligence searches.
DepartmentThe Commonwealth department that would run and maintain the identity verification facilities under the bill. staff and contractors can commit an offence if they improperly record, access or share protected identity-checking information, and the services will face yearly public reporting and independent privacy oversight.
(a) to authorise the Department to develop, operate and maintain the 3 approved identity verification facilities (the DVS hub, the Face Matching Service Hub and the NDLFRS); andIdentity Verification Services as-passed bill text
Those requests can be made only by parties to agreements that contain safeguards for the privacy of individuals whose identification information is used in requesting or providing the services. The identification information used for comparison with that in the request must have been supplied by a government authority that is party to such an agreement.Identity Verification Services as-passed bill text
obtaining an individual’s express consent to the collection, use and disclosure of the individual’s identification information for the purposes of requesting the services (unless the collection, use and disclosure is by a government authority authorised by another law to do so);Identity Verification Services as-passed bill text
limit the use of 1:many matching services to the Face Identification Service (FIS) which can only be used when required to protect the identity of persons with a legally assumed identity, such as undercover officers and witnesses in protection programs. The protection of legally assumed identities will also be support by the use of the FVS. All other 1:many matching through the identity verification services will not be authorised, and is therefore prohibited.Identity Verification Services explanatory memorandum
Operation and use of the approved identity verification facilities are open to oversight and scrutiny in various ways, including publication of documents, annual assessment by the Information Commissioner and annual reporting.Identity Verification Services as-passed bill text
Context
Before this bill, the Commonwealth was already running identity-checking systems such as the Document Verification ServiceThe system that checks a person's identity details, such as name or date of birth, against government records., Face Verification ServiceThe system that compares a person's photo or facial image with an official identity record to confirm they match. and the national driver licence facial recognition system, and they were being used at very large scale by government and businesses even though speakers said they lacked a clear statutory footing. The bill responded by putting those existing services on a legal basis with consent, privacy, access and oversight rules, and after Parliament passed it in December 2023 the framework became law through Royal AssentThe final step that turns the bill into Commonwealth law after Parliament has passed it..
Identity checks were already embedded in everyday transactions
Parliament heard that the Document Verification ServiceThe system that checks a person's identity details, such as name or date of birth, against government records. had been used 140 million times in the previous year and the Face Verification ServiceThe system that compares a person's photo or facial image with an official identity record to confirm they match. 2.6 million times in 2022-23, showing the systems were already widely used before this law.
Hansard ↗Government introduces a bill to give the services a legal footing
The Attorney-General said the bill would provide clear legislative authority for the continued operation of identity verification services and set limits on how they could be used.
Hansard ↗House passes the bill
After debate, the House agreed to the bill at second and third reading, sending it to the Senate after backing the idea of a statutory framework for services already in operation.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Parliament passes the bill
Both houses agreed on the same text after the House accepted Senate amendments, completing the bill's passage through Parliament.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Royal AssentThe final step that turns the bill into Commonwealth law after Parliament has passed it. turns the framework into law
The Governor-General's assent made the new rules for identity verification services part of Commonwealth law.
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 readingThe stage where Parliament debates the principle of the bill and can move amendments asking it to be delayed or rejected., opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second readingThe stage where Parliament debates the principle of the bill and can move amendments asking it to be delayed or rejected. moved
Referred to Committee (14/09/2023): Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (09/11/2023)
Referred to committee
APH bill page notesThe 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 bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Reported from Federation Chamber
Recorded vote: 82 to 51.
The chamber agreed to the bill at second readingThe stage where Parliament debates the principle of the bill and can move amendments asking it to be delayed or rejected., meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second readingThe stage where Parliament debates the principle of the bill and can move amendments asking it to be delayed or rejected. agreed to
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 readingThe stage where Parliament debates the principle of the bill and can move amendments asking it to be delayed or rejected., opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second readingThe stage where Parliament debates the principle of the bill and can move amendments asking it to be delayed or rejected. moved
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The chamber agreed to the bill at second readingThe stage where Parliament debates the principle of the bill and can move amendments asking it to be delayed or rejected., meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second readingThe stage where Parliament debates the principle of the bill and can move amendments asking it to be delayed or rejected. agreed to
Recorded vote: 32 to 6.
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
Third reading agreed to :
The House dealt with Senate amendments or requests so both chambers could settle the bill in the same form.
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 the bill into Commonwealth law after Parliament has passed it., turning the bill into an Act.
Key criticism
The main criticism was that the bill moved ahead before privacy protections, consultation and scrutiny were strong enough, creating risks around bundled consent, cross-jurisdiction data sharing and unclear operational impacts. Those concerns were raised most clearly by the Coalition and Greens, while some broader surveillance warnings came from crossbench opponents and support later became more conditional after amendments.
Most criticism focused on safeguards, drafting and timing rather than rejecting identity verification in principle.
Privacy safeguards not strong enough yet
Critics argued the scheme was being legislated before wider privacy reforms were in place, leaving weak protection around bundled consent, collection and sharing of personal information, and the use of data across jurisdictions.
Rushed process and poor consultation
A sustained objection was that the bill was rushed through with too many unanswered questions about privacy, industry effects, scope and operations, and without enough consultation with states and affected sectors.
Risk of surveillance creep and overreach
Some opponents warned the framework could normalise biometric checking and expand government power beyond what was justified, especially if future limits weakened or consent became too loose in practice.
Further sources
Votes
The chamber-passage votes come first. Expand a vote to see the party breakdown.
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.
Passed 32 to 6. Support came from Labor, Greens, Jacqui Lambie Network, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from One Nation, Nationals, and UAP. One cross-floor vote was recorded: Alex Antic (Liberal Party) voted no. Liberal Party had split recorded votes. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Earlier bill-stage votes
Passed 82 to 51. Support came from Labor, Centre Alliance, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and Greens. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Amendments grouped by chamber. These cards include amendment outcomes recorded without a counted division.
House
Defeated 5 to 65. Support came from Greens. Opposition came from Labor, Centre Alliance, and Liberal Party. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The House rejected the attempt to delay the bill for privacy reforms, so the bill continued without that second-reading condition.
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 6 to 33. Support came from One Nation, Nationals, and UAP. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, Jacqui Lambie Network, and minor parties and independents. One cross-floor vote was recorded: Alex Antic (Liberal Party) voted aye. Liberal Party had split recorded votes. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
If carried, the bill would have used a stricter consent test for each instance of identity verification. The amendments were defeated.
Defeated 8 to 30. Support came from Greens. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, One Nation, Jacqui Lambie Network, and minor parties and independents.
If carried, the bill would have added explicit limits on restricted information in identity verification facilities. The amendments were defeated.
The Senate rejected Senator Shoebridge's second-reading proposal on voices, which sought to postpone further consideration of the bill until the Government's broader privacy reforms were available.
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 rejected Senator Shoebridge's committee amendmentAn amendment moved during detailed Senate consideration of the bill, usually to change specific wording or add safeguards. on voices, which would require an interim review and a broader review of the Act, with the review process starting within 12 months.
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 accepted the Government amendment package on sheet UD100, including privacy, consent, review and rule-making 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 rejected Senator Roberts' committee amendmentAn amendment moved during detailed Senate consideration of the bill, usually to change specific wording or add safeguards. on voices, which would tighten the bill so consent must be active and express for each instance of collection or consented use.
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 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.
The Senate accepted the Government amendment package on sheet UD100, including privacy, consent, review and rule-making changes.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
This list includes amendment votes, procedural votes and votes on the bill itself.
Parliamentary debate
Start here — lead voices
Dreyfus supports the bill, saying it gives clear legal authority for identity verification services while limiting their use and adding strong privacy, security, and oversight safeguards.
Read in Hansard ↗McCormack says the coalition will not back the bill because it was rushed, poorly consulted and leaves too many privacy, security and operational questions unanswered.
Read in Hansard ↗Wolahan says the opposition supports identity verification in principle because it can improve productivity and cut red tape, but argues the bill should have been handled with much better consultation and stronger respect for privacy concerns.
Read in Hansard ↗Fletcher says the opposition cannot support the bill as it stands because there are too many unanswered questions about privacy, industry impacts and the rushed process.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
5 speakers · 5 support
“Digital products are here to stay. They assist our lives in myriad ways. But for too many Australians they have meant compromising their privacy and personal information. The Albanese government is getting the work done to make sure Australians will no longer have to make that compromise. I commend this bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“In conclusion, this bill will ensure the continued use of strong and secure identity verification, enhancing the privacy of Australians.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“These bills will ensure that they can trust the Australian government's identification verification services and continue to access vital government and non-government services. I commend the bills to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“In conclusion, this bill will ensure the continued use of strong and secure identity verification, enhancing the privacy of Australians.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Throughout this debate, we have heard differing views on some aspects of the legislation. The government looks forward to receiving the report of the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee on the bills and will consider any recommendations it may make, as well as issues raised by members in this debate. Australians need strong and secure identity verification services. The limits and safeguards in the bills strike the right balance between achieving fast and convenient identity verification without compromising on privacy. These bills demonstrate the government's commitment to the continued delivery of critical services and the protection of Australians from the threat of identity fraud and theft. I commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
7 speakers · 3 support · 2 oppose · 2 mixed
“I conclude by making the point that there are too many unknowns for the opposition to support these bills as they stand. We will consider our position carefully, including through the committee process. Once the committee has completed its review and it has been possible to properly consider these questions and the answers that have been provided, it may be that the opposition will be in a position to support these bills at that time. I simply cannot make a commitment on that now.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Principally, the coalition does not object to the ethos of this legislation, but we are concerned that the Senate committee apparently asked to not hold even a single hearing. Concerns have already been raised in submissions. There are far too many questions unanswered and too much uncertainty. We simply cannot, as an opposition, effectively just wave legislation such as this through.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“In conclusion, it may be that, once the committee has completed its review, we will support this. As I said, we do support the principle of this bill. At their heart, they are good ideas. It is important that we get this right. But it is, as I said, a missed opportunity, a failure to follow through and, ultimately, a botched process. Until these bills are scrutinised and we have that clarity about their scope and impact, it's not the sort of legislation that we can just wave through.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“There are many studies that show there are enormous efficiencies for productivity, the economy and red tape to be had through this process. Where we disagree with the government is on the way that it has been done. There are many pages of ink being written about what happened on Saturday. I don't want to relitigate those here, but some of it is about not taking people with you. It's not simply the case that our democracy is about commanding the numbers and doing whatever you want. It can't be like that, and it isn't like that.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The many changes that have been agreed, and the supporting work around the edges, have improved this legislation. The legislation is now in a position where the coalition can support it.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I do acknowledge the government is bringing this bill forward for all the right reasons, and I thank the communications minister for that. The only concern on our side is that has been the process and doubling down in looking at that to make sure all those changes which could be made to protect Australians are made.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
2 speakers · 2 oppose
“Omit all words after "that", substitute "further consideration of this bill be postponed until the Government's comprehensive privacy reforms are available to ensure the best possible privacy protections are in place for personal information".”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“"the House declines to give the bill a second reading until the Privacy Act reforms are in place in recognition of the significant privacy and data implications of this proposal".”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
1 speaker · 1 oppose
“I implore the Senate to vote against this bill and to reject this bill. This is the first of three bills necessary to turn Australia into the world's first World Economic Forum digital prison.”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 readingThe stage where Parliament debates the principle of the bill and can move amendments asking it to be delayed or rejected. opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second readingThe stage where Parliament debates the principle of the bill and can move amendments asking it to be delayed or rejected., opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
House · Second reading debate
Second readingThe stage where Parliament debates the principle of the bill and can move amendments asking it to be delayed or rejected. 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 readingThe stage where Parliament debates the principle of the bill and can move amendments asking it to be delayed or rejected. debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Reported from Federation Chamber
Reported from Federation Chamber
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading agreed to
Recorded vote: 82 to 51.
Second readingThe stage where Parliament debates the principle of the bill and can move amendments asking it to be delayed or rejected. agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second readingThe stage where Parliament debates the principle of the bill and can move amendments asking it to be delayed or rejected., meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
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 readingThe stage where Parliament debates the principle of the bill and can move amendments asking it to be delayed or rejected. opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second readingThe stage where Parliament debates the principle of the bill and can move amendments asking it to be delayed or rejected., opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second readingThe stage where Parliament debates the principle of the bill and can move amendments asking it to be delayed or rejected. debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Second reading agreed to
Second readingThe stage where Parliament debates the principle of the bill and can move amendments asking it to be delayed or rejected. agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second readingThe stage where Parliament debates the principle of the bill and can move amendments asking it to be delayed or rejected., meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Senate · Amendments considered
Recorded vote: 32 to 6.
Amendment packages agreed
The chamber considered amendments before the bill 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 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 the bill into Commonwealth law after Parliament has passed it., turning the bill into an Act.
Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (09/11/2023)
Referred to committee
Referred to Committee (14 Sept 2023): Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (9 Nov 2023)
APH bill page notes
