← Back to home Browse all bills

Attorney-General’s Portfolio Miscellaneous Measures

Current status

This bill became law on Jun 11th, 2024.

Policy area

Law, justice & rights

What does this bill do?

ASICThe corporate regulator that investigates and prosecutes many of the business offences this bill moves into the Federal Court.-related corporate crime cases, including some linked summary offences from the same conduct, can now be prosecuted in the Federal CourtThe national court that this bill lets hear more corporate crime cases, and in some situations transfer cases to or from state and territory courts. instead of only in state and territory courts.

Why was it introduced?

Court and administration gaps left ASICThe corporate regulator that investigates and prosecutes many of the business offences this bill moves into the Federal Court. corporate crime matters tied to state courts, Federal CourtThe national court that this bill lets hear more corporate crime cases, and in some situations transfer cases to or from state and territory courts. jury arrangements inflexible, and the COVID-era video witnessing option for marriage notices temporary. The bill lets these cases move into or between courts more easily, allows state officials to prepare Federal CourtThe national court that this bill lets hear more corporate crime cases, and in some situations transfer cases to or from state and territory courts. juries, makes video witnessing permanent, and ends the Native Title Respondents SchemeA government funding program for people and bodies responding to native title claims, which this bill abolishes..

Broader context

Before this bill, ASICThe corporate regulator that investigates and prosecutes many of the business offences this bill moves into the Federal Court.-related corporate crime prosecutions were largely tied to state and territory courts, Federal CourtThe national court that this bill lets hear more corporate crime cases, and in some situations transfer cases to or from state and territory courts. jury preparation rules were inflexible, and the Native Title Respondents SchemeA government funding program for people and bodies responding to native title claims, which this bill abolishes. still remained in legislation even as the government argued it should end. The bill responded by opening a clearer path for corporate crime matters to be heard or transferred in the Federal CourtThe national court that this bill lets hear more corporate crime cases, and in some situations transfer cases to or from state and territory courts., allowing state jury officials to help prepare federal juries, tidying other administration issues, and then became law in June 2024 after debate over the native titleA legal claim to traditional rights and interests in land or waters, which is the subject of the funding scheme this bill ends. funding repeal.

Key criticism

The main criticism was that abolishing the Native Title Respondents SchemeA government funding program for people and bodies responding to native title claims, which this bill abolishes. would remove funding that helps councils and other respondents take part fairly in native titleA legal claim to traditional rights and interests in land or waters, which is the subject of the funding scheme this bill ends. cases, leaving them with heavier legal costs and fewer practical options to defend claims. That objection was raised mainly by Coalition speakers, who said they supported most of the bill’s other machinery changes but opposed it because of this schedule.

Who supported it?

Hon Mark Dreyfus KC, MP introduced this bill. It passed with support from Labor, Greens, some crossbench members; opposed by Liberal Party, Nationals, UAP, some crossbench members.

Introduced in House 15 Nov 2023
Passed House 07 Feb 2024
Passed Senate 16 May 2024 Aye 32 No 23
Became law 11 June 2024

Did it become law?

Yes

Became law 11 June 2024

Final passage

Recorded final vote

1 counted final-passage vote was recorded.

Passage speed

209 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. ASICThe corporate regulator that investigates and prosecutes many of the business offences this bill moves into the Federal Court.-related corporate crime cases, including some linked summary offences from the same conduct, can now be prosecuted in the Federal CourtThe national court that this bill lets hear more corporate crime cases, and in some situations transfer cases to or from state and territory courts. instead of only in state and territory courts.

  2. Corporate crime cases can be moved between the Federal CourtThe national court that this bill lets hear more corporate crime cases, and in some situations transfer cases to or from state and territory courts. and state or territory courts when another court is a better place to hear them.

  3. Federal CourtThe national court that this bill lets hear more corporate crime cases, and in some situations transfer cases to or from state and territory courts. jury panels for serious criminal trials can now be prepared by a state or territory jury official if that state or territory agrees.

  4. Couples can now have a Notice of Intended MarriageThe form couples must give before marrying, and this bill makes it possible for it to be witnessed by video link instead of only in person. witnessed by video link, making a COVID-era option permanent and easier to use.

  5. The law ends the Native Title Respondents SchemeA government funding program for people and bodies responding to native title claims, which this bill abolishes., so this funding path for respondents in native titleA legal claim to traditional rights and interests in land or waters, which is the subject of the funding scheme this bill ends. matters is no longer available.

Show source excerpts
  1. This part will amend the ASIC Act, Corporations Act, Judiciary Act, NCCP Act and SIS Act to confer jurisdiction on the Federal Court to hear and determine a range of summary and indictable offences relating to entities and conduct against those Acts, and the Criminal Code, within the regulatory remit of ASIC.
    Attorney-General’s Portfolio Miscellaneous Measures explanatory memorandum
  2. The new jurisdiction of the Federal Court will operate concurrently with the existing jurisdiction of State and Territory courts in relation to these offences. The Bill makes no changes to the jurisdiction of State and Territory courts. Matters will be able to be transferred between courts to ensure proceedings can be heard across the Australian court system and in the most appropriate forum.
    Attorney-General’s Portfolio Miscellaneous Measures explanatory memorandum
  3. This schedule will amend the Federal Court Act, to improve the efficiency of jury preparation processes for primary indictable proceedings in the Federal Court by enabling the Sheriff to request a State/Territory jury official, with the consent of the relevant State or Territory, to prepare and provide a jury panel to the Sheriff.
    Attorney-General’s Portfolio Miscellaneous Measures explanatory memorandum
  4. The Bill will expand the ways that a Notice of Intended Marriage (NOIM) can be witnessed under Commonwealth law. As well as signing a NOIM in the physical presence of an authorised witness, the Bill will enable a party to sign a NOIM under the observation of an authorised witness via a video link or audio-visual communication link. This will make a temporary measure introduced in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, which ends after 31 December 2023, a permanent feature.
    Attorney-General’s Portfolio Miscellaneous Measures explanatory memorandum
  5. The repeal of section 213A will mean that this avenue of support is no longer available, with potential implications for their capacity to protect and enjoy their non-native title rights and interests in native title claim areas.
    Attorney-General’s Portfolio Miscellaneous Measures explanatory memorandum

Context

Broader context for this bill

Before this bill, ASICThe corporate regulator that investigates and prosecutes many of the business offences this bill moves into the Federal Court.-related corporate crime prosecutions were largely tied to state and territory courts, Federal CourtThe national court that this bill lets hear more corporate crime cases, and in some situations transfer cases to or from state and territory courts. jury preparation rules were inflexible, and the Native Title Respondents SchemeA government funding program for people and bodies responding to native title claims, which this bill abolishes. still remained in legislation even as the government argued it should end. The bill responded by opening a clearer path for corporate crime matters to be heard or transferred in the Federal CourtThe national court that this bill lets hear more corporate crime cases, and in some situations transfer cases to or from state and territory courts., allowing state jury officials to help prepare federal juries, tidying other administration issues, and then became law in June 2024 after debate over the native titleA legal claim to traditional rights and interests in land or waters, which is the subject of the funding scheme this bill ends. funding repeal.

  1. 15 Nov 2023

    Government introduces bill to expand Federal CourtThe national court that this bill lets hear more corporate crime cases, and in some situations transfer cases to or from state and territory courts. corporate crime work

    The Attorney-General said the bill would strengthen the court system’s capacity to handle corporate criminal offences and make Federal CourtThe national court that this bill lets hear more corporate crime cases, and in some situations transfer cases to or from state and territory courts. jury preparation more efficient.

    Hansard ↗
  2. 07 Feb 2024

    House passes the bill after debate over ending the Native Title Respondents SchemeA government funding program for people and bodies responding to native title claims, which this bill abolishes.

    Speakers backed the court and jury changes while also arguing over repeal of the legislative basis for respondent funding in native titleA legal claim to traditional rights and interests in land or waters, which is the subject of the funding scheme this bill ends. matters.

    Hansard ↗
  3. 28 May 2024

    Parliament passes the bill

    Both houses agreed on the same text, clearing the way for the package of court, marriage and native titleA legal claim to traditional rights and interests in land or waters, which is the subject of the funding scheme this bill ends. changes to become law.

    Parliamentary timeline ↗
  4. 11 June 2024

    Royal AssentThe Governor-General's formal approval that turns a passed bill into an Act. makes the changes law

    The Governor-General’s assent enacted the measure, allowing the updated court arrangements and repeal of the native titleA legal claim to traditional rights and interests in land or waters, which is the subject of the funding scheme this bill ends. respondent funding scheme to take legal effect under the Act.

    Parliamentary timeline ↗

Legislative route

How did it move through Parliament?

House Senate
Introduced 15 Nov 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 15 Nov 2023

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

Second reading moved

Second reading debate 28 Nov 2023

The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.

Sent to Federation Chamber for debate 28 Nov 2023

The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.

Referred to Federation Chamber

Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (01/02/2024) review 30 Nov 2023

Referred to Committee (30/11/2023): Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (01/02/2024)

Referred to committee

APH bill page notes
Second reading debate 07 Feb 2024

The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.

Returned from Federation Chamber 07 Feb 2024

The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.

Reported from Federation Chamber

House second reading agreed Aye 88 No 52 07 Feb 2024

Recorded vote: 88 to 52.

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

House third reading agreed 07 Feb 2024

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

Introduced 08 Feb 2024

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 08 Feb 2024

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 Aye 11 No 25 16 May 2024

Recorded vote: 11 to 25.

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 agreed to amendment packages Aye 32 No 23 16 May 2024

Recorded vote: 32 to 23.

The Senate agreed to one government amendment and then passed the bill at third reading.

Third reading agreed to :

Consideration of Senate message 28 May 2024

The House dealt with Senate amendments or requests so both chambers could settle the bill in the same form. The main accepted Senate changes reflected in the final bill were: The introduced and as-passed bill texts differ in 2 observed text blocks. Observed text changed from "Part 3—Corrections 56 Federal Circuit and Family Court of AustraliaThe federal family law court system, which is part of the portfolio laws this bill updates even though it is not the bill's main focus. Act 2021 56 Federal Court of AustraliaThe national court that this bill lets hear more corporate crime cases, and in some situations transfer cases to or from state and territory courts. Act 1976 56…" to "Part 2A—Membership of Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human RightsA parliamentary committee that checks bills for human rights issues, and one amendment in the debate would have increased its membership. 56 Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011 5…".

Passed both houses 28 May 2024

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

Finally passed both Houses

Assent 11 June 2024

The Governor-General gave Royal AssentThe Governor-General's formal approval that turns a passed bill into an Act., turning the bill into an Act.

Key criticism

The main case against this bill

The main criticism was that abolishing the Native Title Respondents SchemeA government funding program for people and bodies responding to native title claims, which this bill abolishes. would remove funding that helps councils and other respondents take part fairly in native titleA legal claim to traditional rights and interests in land or waters, which is the subject of the funding scheme this bill ends. cases, leaving them with heavier legal costs and fewer practical options to defend claims. That objection was raised mainly by Coalition speakers, who said they supported most of the bill’s other machinery changes but opposed it because of this schedule.

Criticism was concentrated on the native titleA legal claim to traditional rights and interests in land or waters, which is the subject of the funding scheme this bill ends. funding repeal rather than the bill’s wider court and marriage measures.

Native title respondents could lose practical access to justice

Opponents argued that repealing the Native Title Respondents SchemeA government funding program for people and bodies responding to native title claims, which this bill abolishes. would strip away funding relied on by councils and other respondents in native titleA legal claim to traditional rights and interests in land or waters, which is the subject of the funding scheme this bill ends. matters, making it harder and more expensive for them to participate properly and defend claims. They warned this would shift major legal and financial burdens onto local communities and public bodies.

Raised by Coalition speakers including Paul Fletcher and Henry Pike Source ↗

Further sources

parlinfo.aph.gov.au ↗

Votes

Recorded votes

How the bill itself passed

The chamber-passage votes come first. Expand a vote to see the party breakdown.

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.

07 Feb 2024

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.

Carried

Senate passed the bill

Aye 32 No 23

Passed 32 to 23. Support came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and UAP. Minor-party and independent votes were split.

16 May 2024

Party Recorded votes Aye / No
Labor 17 / 0
Liberal Party 0 / 15
Greens 11 / 0
Unknown 2 / 3
Nationals 0 / 4
Independent 2 / 0
UAP 0 / 1

Earlier bill-stage votes

Carried

House cleared second reading

Aye 88 No 52

Passed 88 to 52. Support came from Labor, Greens, Centre Alliance, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party and Nationals. Minor-party and independent votes were split.

07 Feb 2024

Party Recorded votes Aye / No
Labor 65 / 0
Unknown 14 / 21
Liberal Party 0 / 19
Nationals 0 / 12
Independent 7 / 0
Greens 1 / 0
Centre Alliance 1 / 0
Carried

Keep native title scheme repeal in bill

Aye 32 No 24

Passed 32 to 24. Support came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and UAP. Minor-party and independent votes were split.

16 May 2024

Party Recorded votes Aye / No
Labor 17 / 0
Liberal Party 0 / 14
Greens 11 / 0
Unknown 2 / 5
Nationals 0 / 4
Independent 2 / 0
UAP 0 / 1
Defeated

Senate cleared second reading

Aye 11 No 25

Defeated 11 to 25. Support came from Greens. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, Nationals, and minor parties and independents.

16 May 2024

Party Recorded votes Aye / No
Labor 0 / 15
Greens 11 / 0
Liberal Party 0 / 4
Unknown 0 / 3
Independent 0 / 2
Nationals 0 / 1

Amendments at a glance

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

House

Carried

House accepted human-rights committee amendment

Aye 87 No 52

Passed 87 to 52. Support came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party and Nationals. Minor-party and independent votes were split.

28 May 2024

This settled the bill in the same form in both chambers and allowed it to be finally passed.

Party Recorded votes Aye / No
Labor 64 / 0
Unknown 15 / 21
Liberal Party 0 / 21
Nationals 0 / 10
Independent 7 / 0
Greens 1 / 0
Carried

House accepted all Senate amendments

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.

Hansard record ↗

Senate

Carried

Expand human rights committee membership

Aye 32 No 24

Passed 32 to 24. Support came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and UAP. Minor-party and independent votes were split.

16 May 2024

This was a technical change to the bill's committee membership rules before the bill advanced.

Party Recorded votes Aye / No
Labor 17 / 0
Liberal Party 0 / 14
Greens 11 / 0
Unknown 2 / 5
Nationals 0 / 4
Independent 2 / 0
UAP 0 / 1
Defeated

Expand human rights definitions

Aye 11 No 25

Defeated 11 to 25. Support came from Greens. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, Nationals, and minor parties and independents.

16 May 2024

The bill kept its existing human rights definitions rather than broadening them to include those international instruments.

Party Recorded votes Aye / No
Labor 0 / 15
Greens 11 / 0
Liberal Party 0 / 4
Unknown 0 / 3
Independent 0 / 2
Nationals 0 / 1

This list includes amendment votes, procedural votes and votes on the bill itself.

Parliamentary debate

Who spoke, and what they said

Start here — lead voices

Sponsor speech Supports

Mark Dreyfus

Australian Labor Party • MP 15 Nov 2023

Dreyfus supports the bill and says it will improve and clarify several laws administered by the Attorney-General, including court procedure, marriage celebrants and family law arbitration.

Read in Hansard ↗
Lead opposing voice Opposes

Henry Pike

Liberal National Party • MP 07 Feb 2024

Pike says the coalition will oppose the bill because it abolishes the native titleA legal claim to traditional rights and interests in land or waters, which is the subject of the funding scheme this bill ends. respondent funding scheme, which he argues is needed to help councils and other respondents defend native titleA legal claim to traditional rights and interests in land or waters, which is the subject of the funding scheme this bill ends. claims fairly.

Read in Hansard ↗
Lead supporting voice Supports

Stephen Bates

Australian Greens • MP 07 Feb 2024

Stephen Bates says the Greens will support the bill in the House because it makes sensible administrative changes and repeals obsolete native titleA legal claim to traditional rights and interests in land or waters, which is the subject of the funding scheme this bill ends. funding provisions, but he says they may seek amendments in the Senate over the marriage celebrant changes and other technical impacts.

Read in Hansard ↗
Lead voice Supports

Jenny McAllister

Australian Labor Party • Senator 08 Feb 2024

McAllister supports the bill and says it will update and improve several pieces of Attorney-General portfolio law, including the Federal CourtThe national court that this bill lets hear more corporate crime cases, and in some situations transfer cases to or from state and territory courts., marriage law and family arbitration, while also repealing the Native Title Respondents SchemeA government funding program for people and bodies responding to native title claims, which this bill abolishes..

Read in Hansard ↗

All speeches by bloc

Labor

2 speakers · 3 contributions · 2 support

  1. Jenny McAllister ★ McAllister supports the bill and says it will update and improve several pieces of Attorney-General portfolio law, including the Federal CourtThe national court that this bill lets hear more corporate crime cases, and in some situations transfer cases to or from state and territory courts., marriage law and family arbitration, while also repealing the Native Title Respondents SchemeA government funding program for people and bodies responding to native title claims, which this bill abolishes..
    “This Bill will deliver a range of amendments to legislation administered by the Attorney-General, to provide lasting benefits to Australia's legal system.”

    Australian Labor Party • Senator • 08 Feb 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  2. Mark Dreyfus ★ 2 contributions Dreyfus supports the bill and says it will improve and clarify several laws administered by the Attorney-General, including court procedure, marriage celebrants and family law arbitration.

    Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Mark Dreyfus on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.

    Minister's second reading speech Australian Labor Party • MP • 15 Nov 2023

    Dreyfus supports the bill and says it will improve and clarify several laws administered by the Attorney-General, including court procedure, marriage celebrants and family law arbitration. He presents it as a practical package that will strengthen the legal system and commends it to the House.

    “This bill will deliver a range of amendments to legislation administered by the Attorney-General, to provide lasting benefits to Australia's legal system.”
    Read this contribution in Hansard ↗

    Second reading speech Australian Labor Party • MP • 07 Feb 2024

    Dreyfus supports the bill and says it makes a range of important and necessary changes to laws in his portfolio, including measures to improve court processes, abolish the native titleA legal claim to traditional rights and interests in land or waters, which is the subject of the funding scheme this bill ends. respondent scheme, and streamline family law and marriage celebrant administration.

    “The bill will also clarify and improve the operation of the Commonwealth Marriage Celebrants Program, provide greater accessibility for marrying couples by allowing couples to have the notice of intended marriage witnessed remotely and streamline the administrative process used in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia for family law arbitration applications to review an arbitral award or to determine a question of law. In conclusion, these amendments will make a number of appropriate and necessary improvements to laws in my portfolio. I commend the bill to the House.”
    Read this contribution in Hansard ↗

Coalition

2 speakers · 2 oppose

  1. Henry Pike ★ Pike says the coalition will oppose the bill because it abolishes the native titleA legal claim to traditional rights and interests in land or waters, which is the subject of the funding scheme this bill ends. respondent funding scheme, which he argues is needed to help councils and other respondents defend native titleA legal claim to traditional rights and interests in land or waters, which is the subject of the funding scheme this bill ends. claims fairly.
    “I find it deeply regrettable that the Labor government has chosen to abolish the native title respondent funding scheme through this bill, particularly at a time when my community is facing one of the biggest native title claims this country has ever seen.”

    Liberal National Party • MP • 07 Feb 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  2. Paul Fletcher Fletcher says the coalition supports most of the bill's machinery changes, but will not support it in its current form because schedule 4 would repeal the Native Title Respondents SchemeA government funding program for people and bodies responding to native title claims, which this bill abolishes..
    “As I said at the outset, the majority of this miscellaneous measures bill was straightforward and makes sensible changes that, on this side of the House, we are happy to support. But we cannot support the bill in its current form so long as it includes the present schedule in relation to the Native Title Respondents Scheme.”

    Liberal Party • MP • 28 Nov 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗

Greens

1 speaker · 1 support

  1. Stephen Bates ★ Stephen Bates says the Greens will support the bill in the House because it makes sensible administrative changes and repeals obsolete native titleA legal claim to traditional rights and interests in land or waters, which is the subject of the funding scheme this bill ends. funding provisions, but he says they may seek amendments in the Senate over the marriage celebrant changes and other technical impacts.
    “As I said, we will be supporting the bill in the House but reserving our position, pending amendments, in the Senate.”

    Australian Greens • MP • 07 Feb 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗

Record

Full record

Full chat