This bill became law on Nov 27th, 2023.
Law, justice & rights
Federal prisoners must still get a parole decision as soon as practical even if the Attorney-GeneralThe federal minister responsible for making or refusing parole orders for federal offenders under this bill. misses the deadline at the end of the non-parole periodThe part of a prison sentence that must be served before a parole decision is due..
Missed federal parole deadlines, a loophole letting unregistered chemical importers dodge border drug offences, and uncertainty around past ACICThe national crime intelligence body whose past authorisations this bill validates. authorisations exposed gaps in crimes law. The bill clarifies overdue parole decisions, expands import offences and seizure powers to those chemicals, and validates past ACICThe national crime intelligence body whose past authorisations this bill validates. actions, with compensation if property is unfairly taken.
Australia already had federal parole rules, border controls and ACICThe national crime intelligence body whose past authorisations this bill validates. powers in place, but by late 2023 officials said missed parole deadlines could leave decisions in doubt, unregistered importers could bring in listed dual-use chemicals for drug manufacture, and some past ACICThe national crime intelligence body whose past authorisations this bill validates. actions needed legal certainty. After the government framed those gaps against the broader cost of serious and organised crime, Parliament moved quickly to pass the bill and Royal AssentThe final step that turns the bill into an Act and makes its changes law. turned the fixes, seizure powers and validation measures into law.
The main criticism was that the bill retrospectively validated past ACICThe national crime intelligence body whose past authorisations this bill validates. conduct and was rushed through Parliament without enough explanation, scrutiny or time to test amendments, creating legal and rights concerns. That case was raised by the Greens rather than across the Parliament, while the government and coalition treated the bill as mainly technical and supported it.
Mark Dreyfus MP introduced this bill. It passed with support from Labor, Liberal Party, One Nation, some crossbench members; opposed by Greens.
Did it become law?
Yes
Became law 27 Nov 2023
Final passage
Recorded final vote
1 counted final-passage vote was recorded.
Passage speed
13 days
From introduction to the latest recorded parliamentary step
Meaning
Federal prisoners must still get a parole decision as soon as practical even if the Attorney-GeneralThe federal minister responsible for making or refusing parole orders for federal offenders under this bill. misses the deadline at the end of the non-parole periodThe part of a prison sentence that must be served before a parole decision is due..
People refused federal parole must still get a fresh parole decision as soon as practical if the required 12-month reconsideration deadline is missed.
Unregistered importers of listed dual-use chemicals can face criminal penalties and have those chemicals seized by the Australian Border ForceThe border agency that can seize the listed chemicals when unregistered importers bring them in. before they enter Australia.
The law confirms past Australian Crime CommissionThe former name used for some of the powers and past actions being validated by this bill. and Australian Criminal Intelligence CommissionThe national crime intelligence body whose past authorisations this bill validates. actions covered by certain board authorisations or determinations remain legally valid, including in court matters.
If this validation law takes property from someone unfairly, the Commonwealth must pay reasonable compensation and the person can go to the Federal Court if the amount is disputed.
(1A) If the Attorney‑General does not, under subsection (1), make, or refuse to make, a parole order for a person before the end of the non‑parole period referred to in that subsection, the Attorney‑General must, as soon as practicable after the end of that period, make, or refuse to make, a parole order for the person.Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Omnibus No. 2) Act 2023 final Act text
(2A) If the Attorney‑General does not, under paragraph (2)(b), reconsider the making of a parole order for a person and either make, or refuse to make, such an order before the end of the 12 month period referred to in that paragraph, the Attorney‑General must, as soon as practicable after the end of that period, reconsider and either make, or refuse to make, a parole order for the person.Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Omnibus No. 2) Act 2023 final Act text
Entities that fail to register with AICIS under the IC Act prior to import will be subject to appropriate criminal penalties in the relevant import offences under Part 9.1 of the Criminal Code, and can have their imported chemicals seized by the Australian Border Force (ABF).Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Omnibus No. 2) explanatory memorandum
(3) The thing done is as valid and effective, and is taken for all purposes always to have been as valid and effective, as it would have been if the relevant authorisation or relevant determination were not invalid or ineffective.Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Omnibus No. 2) Act 2023 final Act text
(5) If the operation of this item would result in an acquisition of property (within the meaning of paragraph 51(xxxi) of the Constitution) from a person otherwise than on just terms (within the meaning of that paragraph), the Commonwealth is liable to pay a reasonable amount of compensation to the person.Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Omnibus No. 2) Act 2023 final Act text
Context
Australia already had federal parole rules, border controls and ACICThe national crime intelligence body whose past authorisations this bill validates. powers in place, but by late 2023 officials said missed parole deadlines could leave decisions in doubt, unregistered importers could bring in listed dual-use chemicals for drug manufacture, and some past ACICThe national crime intelligence body whose past authorisations this bill validates. actions needed legal certainty. After the government framed those gaps against the broader cost of serious and organised crime, Parliament moved quickly to pass the bill and Royal AssentThe final step that turns the bill into an Act and makes its changes law. turned the fixes, seizure powers and validation measures into law.
Serious and organised crime was estimated to cost Australia over $60 billion
The government cited this estimate to argue that gaps in criminal law and enforcement tools had significant real-world consequences.
Hansard ↗Government says missed parole deadlines, chemical import loopholes and ACICThe national crime intelligence body whose past authorisations this bill validates. uncertainty need fixing
In introducing the bill, the Attorney-GeneralThe federal minister responsible for making or refusing parole orders for federal offenders under this bill. said the changes were needed to ensure overdue federal parole decisions could still be made, stop unregistered importers bringing in listed dual-use chemicals, and put past ACICThe national crime intelligence body whose past authorisations this bill validates. actions beyond doubt.
Hansard ↗Opposition backs the bill and says it will help speed passage
Coalition speakers said they supported the three-part bill, helping clear the way for rapid parliamentary passage.
Hansard ↗Parliament passes the bill
Both houses passed the legislation in the same form, completing Parliament's response to the identified parole, border enforcement and ACICThe national crime intelligence body whose past authorisations this bill validates. issues.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Royal AssentThe final step that turns the bill into an Act and makes its changes law. makes the changes law
Royal AssentThe final step that turns the bill into an Act and makes its changes law. turned the bill into an Act, giving legal effect to the clarified parole powers, new import and seizure offences, and validation of past ACICThe national crime intelligence body whose past authorisations this bill validates. actions.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Legislative route
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Third reading agreed to
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Recorded vote: 31 to 11.
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
Recorded vote: 21 to 10.
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Third reading agreed to
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 an Act and makes its changes law., turning the bill into an Act.
Key criticism
The main criticism was that the bill retrospectively validated past ACICThe national crime intelligence body whose past authorisations this bill validates. conduct and was rushed through Parliament without enough explanation, scrutiny or time to test amendments, creating legal and rights concerns. That case was raised by the Greens rather than across the Parliament, while the government and coalition treated the bill as mainly technical and supported it.
Criticism was real but narrow, centred on retrospectivity, urgency and scrutiny rather than the bill’s broader policy aims.
Retrospective validation of past conduct
Greens MPs argued the bill would retrospectively validate past ACICThe national crime intelligence body whose past authorisations this bill validates. actions that may have been legally questionable, and said Parliament should not fix that after the fact without a fuller justification.
Rushed process and weak scrutiny
Critics said the bill was being pushed through too quickly, without proper briefing, detailed scrutiny or enough time to consider amendments, despite dealing with legality and rights issues.
Unclear urgency and justification
Greens speakers argued the government had not clearly explained why the bill was urgent or exactly what problem required immediate retrospective legislation, and said Parliament was being asked to accept that on trust.
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 21 to 10. Support came from Labor, Liberal Party, One Nation, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Greens.
Earlier bill-stage votes
Passed 31 to 11. Support came from Labor, Liberal Party, Jacqui Lambie Network, One Nation, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Greens.
These are votes on the bill itself rather than amendment votes.
Parliamentary debate
Start here — lead voices
Dreyfus supports the bill, saying it will clarify parole decisions, strengthen import controls on illicit drug precursor chemicals, and confirm the validity of ACICThe national crime intelligence body whose past authorisations this bill validates. authorisations so law enforcement can better combat serious and organised crime.
Read in Hansard ↗Shoebridge says the Greens will oppose the bill because it is being rushed through without proper scrutiny and appears designed to retrospectively validate questionable ACICThe national crime intelligence body whose past authorisations this bill validates. activities without a frank explanation from the government.
Read in Hansard ↗Cash says the coalition will support the bill and help it pass, because it makes sensible technical fixes to parole, drug importation and ACICThe national crime intelligence body whose past authorisations this bill validates. processes without catching legitimate conduct.
Read in Hansard ↗Bandt says the Greens cannot support the bill passing the House because it is retrospective criminal legislation being rushed through without proper briefing, scrutiny, or time to consider amendments.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
2 speakers · 3 contributions · 2 support
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
Dreyfus supports the bill, saying it will clarify parole decisions, strengthen import controls on illicit drug precursor chemicals, and confirm the validity of ACICThe national crime intelligence body whose past authorisations this bill validates. authorisations so law enforcement can better combat serious and organised crime.
“I commend the bill to the House.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Dreyfus supports the bill, saying it will clarify parole decision-making, tighten controls on chemicals used to make illicit drugs, and help the Australian Criminal Intelligence CommissionThe national crime intelligence body whose past authorisations this bill validates. keep fighting serious and organised crime. He presents it as a practical law-enforcement update that protects the community.
“Finally, the amendments in schedule 3 will ensure that the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission can continue to undertake its vital statutory function to combat serious and organised crime in Australia and keep the Australian community safe.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“The bill will update, improve and clarify the intended operation of key provisions in the Crimes Act 1914, the Criminal Code Act 1995 and the Australian Crime Commission Act 2002. These amendments are required to support the proper administration of justice and combat serious and organised crime.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
2 speakers · 2 support
“The coalition will be supporting this bill. On behalf of Senator Paterson and myself, we will facilitate its passage through the parliament.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise to speak on the Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Omnibus No. 2) Bill. The coalition will be supporting this bill, and we will facilitate its passage through the parliament.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
2 speakers · 2 oppose
“We won't be supporting this bill, and we don't support the undue haste. We call upon the government to be frank next time and to be honest. We call on the government to tell us their real motivations, and perhaps if they had said to us, 'Well, look, we have real concern here about a bunch of authorisations that were done in good faith and we thought were lawful and had the right checks and balances in them but because of a technical drafting error may have been unlawful, and we're worried that a number of significant organised crime figures may avoid legal sanctions because of this legal technicality, so we just want to fix that,' and they'd laid out their credible argument, absolutely we would have listened.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“So we can't support this bill's passage through the House, and we reserve our position in the Senate. I hope that the government can put this through the usual processes where we can have a look at it. Who knows? We may end up supporting it. In the time that we've had available to look at it—I've referred to the explanatory memorandum—in the time that we've had available to digest it, it has raised questions. It raises questions. I'll conclude on this: when we're talking about retrospective legislation in the criminal sphere, why is it that the bar is all of a sudden lowered now that Labor's in government and it's okay to rush a bill with retrospective application in a criminal sphere through, without going through the usual processes?”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Record
House · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
House · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading agreed to
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
House · Third reading agreed to
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Senate · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Senate · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Second reading agreed to
Recorded vote: 31 to 11.
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Senate · Third reading agreed to
Recorded vote: 21 to 10.
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
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 an Act and makes its changes law., turning the bill into an Act.
