← Back to home Browse all bills

Migration Amendment (Bridging Visa Conditions)

Current status

This bill became law on Nov 17th, 2023.

Policy area

Immigration, border & security

What does this bill do?

People released on a removal pending bridging visaA short-term visa used here for people who cannot be kept in immigration detention but are still expected to be removed from Australia. can now face criminal charges if they breach electronic monitoringA way of checking where a person is and whether they are following visa conditions, usually through a tracking device and reporting rules. rules attached to that visa.

Why was it introduced?

The High CourtAustralia's highest court, whose November 2023 orders triggered the changes in this bill.’s 8 November 2023 NZYQThe High Court case that forced the government to release some detainees because they could not lawfully be kept in detention on the old basis. orders left some non-citizens who could not yet be removed unable to stay in immigration detention after release on bridging visas. This bill strengthens those visas by adding curfews, electronic tracking and child-safety work limits, and creates criminal penalties for serious breaches.

Broader context

Australia had been holding some non-citizens in immigration detention even when there was no real prospect of removing them soon, but the High CourtAustralia's highest court, whose November 2023 orders triggered the changes in this bill.’s 8 November 2023 orders in NZYQThe High Court case that forced the government to release some detainees because they could not lawfully be kept in detention on the old basis. meant those people had to be released and some were quickly moved onto bridging visas. The bill was rushed through Parliament to tighten those visas with curfews, electronic monitoringA way of checking where a person is and whether they are following visa conditions, usually through a tracking device and reporting rules., tracking-device rules and child-safety work limits, then became law the next day so those conditions could be enforced with criminal penalties.

Key criticism

Critics said the bill was rushed and either too weak to protect the public or too legally risky, using visa conditions and mandatory jail terms as a backdoor form of detention. Coalition speakers mainly argued it did not go far enough and was poorly prepared, while the Greens and some crossbenchers warned of overreach, constitutional risk and the need for tighter safeguards.

Who supported it?

Hon Andrew Giles MP introduced this bill. It passed with support from Labor, Liberal Party, Nationals, Jacqui Lambie Network, some crossbench members; opposed by Greens.

Introduced in House 16 Nov 2023
Passed House 16 Nov 2023
Passed Senate 16 Nov 2023 Aye 36 No 11
Became law 17 Nov 2023

Did it become law?

Yes

Became law 17 Nov 2023

Final passage

Recorded final vote

1 counted final-passage vote was recorded.

Passage speed

1 day

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. People released on a removal pending bridging visaA short-term visa used here for people who cannot be kept in immigration detention but are still expected to be removed from Australia. can now face criminal charges if they breach electronic monitoringA way of checking where a person is and whether they are following visa conditions, usually through a tracking device and reporting rules. rules attached to that visa.

  2. Courts must sentence a person to at least 1 year in prison if they are convicted of breaching key monitoring, curfewA rule that requires a person to stay at their notified address during set night-time hours. or tracking-device offences on this visa.

  3. Removal pending bridging visaA short-term visa used here for people who cannot be kept in immigration detention but are still expected to be removed from Australia. holders can be made to stay at their notified addressThe home address the visa holder must tell the department about and usually stay at during curfew hours. overnight, usually from 10 pm to 6 am, or during other hours set by the Minister.

  4. Removal pending bridging visaA short-term visa used here for people who cannot be kept in immigration detention but are still expected to be removed from Australia. holders can be required to wear an electronic tracking deviceA device the person must wear so authorities can monitor their location or movements. at all times.

  5. People on these visas who were convicted of offences against children or other vulnerable people can be banned from work or organised activities that involve more than incidental contact with them.

Show source excerpts
  1. Appropriate amendments to the bridging visa conditions to protect the community, increase monitoring capabilities and reporting obligations, and secure ongoing engagement with the Department of Home Affairs. Including mandatory reporting obligations and discretionary curfew and monitoring requirements which will be imposed on a case-by-case basis only where necessary to protect the safety of the community, and new criminal offences for failing to comply with these reporting and monitoring conditions.
    Minister's second reading speech
  2. 76DA Mandatory 1 year imprisonment for offences
    Migration Amendment (Bridging Visa Conditions) as-passed bill text
  3. 8620 (1) The holder must, between 10 pm on one day and 6 am the next day or between such other times as are specified in writing by the Minister, remain at a notified address for the holder for those days.
    Migration Amendment (Bridging Visa Conditions) as-passed bill text
  4. 8621 (1) The holder must wear a monitoring device at all times.
    Migration Amendment (Bridging Visa Conditions) as-passed bill text
  5. 8622 (1) If the holder has been convicted of an offence that involves a minor or any other vulnerable person, the holder must not perform any work, or participate in any regular organised activity, involving more than incidental contact with a minor or any other vulnerable person.
    Migration Amendment (Bridging Visa Conditions) as-passed bill text

Context

Broader context for this bill

Australia had been holding some non-citizens in immigration detention even when there was no real prospect of removing them soon, but the High CourtAustralia's highest court, whose November 2023 orders triggered the changes in this bill.’s 8 November 2023 orders in NZYQThe High Court case that forced the government to release some detainees because they could not lawfully be kept in detention on the old basis. meant those people had to be released and some were quickly moved onto bridging visas. The bill was rushed through Parliament to tighten those visas with curfews, electronic monitoringA way of checking where a person is and whether they are following visa conditions, usually through a tracking device and reporting rules., tracking-device rules and child-safety work limits, then became law the next day so those conditions could be enforced with criminal penalties.

  1. 08 Nov 2023

    High CourtAustralia's highest court, whose November 2023 orders triggered the changes in this bill. orders release of detainees in NZYQThe High Court case that forced the government to release some detainees because they could not lawfully be kept in detention on the old basis.

    The High CourtAustralia's highest court, whose November 2023 orders triggered the changes in this bill.’s orders in NZYQThe High Court case that forced the government to release some detainees because they could not lawfully be kept in detention on the old basis. meant non-citizens with no real prospect of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future could no longer be kept in immigration detention on the previous basis.

    Explanatory memorandum ↗
  2. Mid-Nov 2023

    Released detainees are moved onto bridging visas

    In the days after the ruling, the government said detainees were released from detention and managed in the community on bridging visas, creating pressure for tighter visa controls.

    Hansard ↗
  3. 16 Nov 2023

    Parliament passes the bill

    Both houses passed urgent amendments adding curfews, electronic tracking, child-safety work restrictions and new offences for serious breaches of removal pending bridging visaA short-term visa used here for people who cannot be kept in immigration detention but are still expected to be removed from Australia. conditions.

    Parliamentary timeline ↗
  4. 17 Nov 2023

    Bill receives Royal Assent

    Royal Assent turned the bill into an Act, allowing the strengthened bridging visa regime and its criminal penalties to take legal effect.

    Parliamentary timeline ↗

Legislative route

How did it move through Parliament?

House Senate
Introduced 16 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 16 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 16 Nov 2023

The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.

House second reading agreed 16 Nov 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

House third reading agreed 16 Nov 2023

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 16 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 16 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 16 Nov 2023

The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.

Senate second reading agreed Aye 32 No 11 16 Nov 2023

Recorded vote: 32 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

Senate agreed to amendment packages 16 Nov 2023

The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.

Committee of the Whole debate

Senate third reading agreed Aye 36 No 11 16 Nov 2023

Recorded vote: 36 to 11.

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

Third reading agreed to

House agreed to Senate amendments 16 Nov 2023

The House dealt with Senate amendments or requests so both chambers could settle the bill in the same form.

Consideration of Senate message

Passed both houses 16 Nov 2023

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

Finally passed both Houses

Assent 17 Nov 2023

The Governor-General gave Royal Assent, turning the bill into an Act.

Human Rights review 29 Nov 2023

The human rights committee examined the mandatory bridging-visa conditions and associated criminal offences, including the one-year mandatory minimum sentence.

Seeking information

Report 13 of 2023

Key criticism

The main case against this bill

Critics said the bill was rushed and either too weak to protect the public or too legally risky, using visa conditions and mandatory jail terms as a backdoor form of detention. Coalition speakers mainly argued it did not go far enough and was poorly prepared, while the Greens and some crossbenchers warned of overreach, constitutional risk and the need for tighter safeguards.

Criticism was real but split between demands for tougher powers and warnings against overreach.

Rushed and not strong enough on community safety

The main Coalition criticism was that the bill was introduced too late and drafted too hastily, leaving only basic monitoring and curfewA rule that requires a person to stay at their notified address during set night-time hours. measures when stronger protections were needed. Critics in this camp argued the government should have prepared earlier for the High CourtAustralia's highest court, whose November 2023 orders triggered the changes in this bill. ruling and considered tougher options, including stronger detention or mandatory controls.

Raised by Coalition MPs including Peter Dutton, Dan Tehan, David Coleman and Andrew Hastie Source ↗

Backdoor detention and possible legal overreach

Greens senators and MPs argued the bill risked recreating detention by another name through curfews, electronic monitoringA way of checking where a person is and whether they are following visa conditions, usually through a tracking device and reporting rules. and mandatory prison terms tied to visa status. They warned it could be unconstitutional, bypass ordinary judicial processes and set a dangerous precedent for punishing refugees and stateless people through migration law rather than ordinary criminal law.

Raised by The Greens, including Adam Bandt, Sarah Hanson-Young, Mehreen Faruqi and David Shoebridge Source ↗

Too much discretion and too few safeguards

Some criticism focused less on the policy goal than on drafting and safeguards, especially the risk that important protections would depend on ministerial choice rather than clear legal requirements. Critics wanted stronger reporting, clearer mandatory rules and review mechanisms, while some crossbench support was explicitly temporary or conditional on careful use.

Raised by Keith Wolahan, Zoe Daniel and other speakers seeking tighter safeguards or amendments Source ↗

Further sources

parlinfo.aph.gov.au ↗ 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.

16 Nov 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.

Carried

Senate passed the bill

Aye 36 No 11

Passed 36 to 11. Support came from Labor, Liberal Party, Nationals, Jacqui Lambie Network, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Greens.

16 Nov 2023

Party Recorded votes Aye / No
Labor 19 / 0
Greens 0 / 11
Liberal Party 10 / 0
Nationals 2 / 0
Unknown 2 / 0
Independent 1 / 0
Jacqui Lambie Network 1 / 0
One Nation 1 / 0

Earlier bill-stage votes

Carried

Senate cleared second reading

Aye 32 No 11

Passed 32 to 11. Support came from Labor, Liberal Party, Jacqui Lambie Network, Nationals, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Greens.

16 Nov 2023

Party Recorded votes Aye / No
Labor 18 / 0
Greens 0 / 11
Liberal Party 10 / 0
Independent 1 / 0
Jacqui Lambie Network 1 / 0
Nationals 1 / 0
UAP 1 / 0

Amendments at a glance

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

House

Carried

House accepted tougher visa amendments

Aye 106 No 8

Passed 106 to 8. Support came from Labor, Liberal Party, Nationals, and Centre Alliance. Opposition came from Greens. Minor-party and independent votes were split.

16 Nov 2023

This let the amended bill pass both chambers in the same form.

Party Recorded votes Aye / No
Labor 51 / 0
Unknown 27 / 4
Liberal Party 13 / 0
Nationals 10 / 0
Independent 4 / 3
Greens 0 / 1
Centre Alliance 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

Report progress on the bill

Aye 29 No 13

Passed 29 to 13. Support came from Labor, Liberal Party, Nationals, and One Nation. Opposition came from Greens, Jacqui Lambie Network, and minor parties and independents.

16 Nov 2023

This paused committee consideration and deferred further debate to a later sitting.

Party Recorded votes Aye / No
Labor 19 / 0
Greens 0 / 11
Liberal Party 7 / 0
Nationals 2 / 0
Independent 0 / 1
Jacqui Lambie Network 0 / 1
One Nation 1 / 0
Carried

Add continuing-offence rule

Aye 31 No 11

Passed 31 to 11. Support came from Labor, Liberal Party, Nationals, Jacqui Lambie Network, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Greens.

16 Nov 2023

This was part of the government package tightening how offences under the bill would operate.

Party Recorded votes Aye / No
Labor 19 / 0
Greens 0 / 11
Liberal Party 7 / 0
Nationals 2 / 0
Independent 1 / 0
Jacqui Lambie Network 1 / 0
One Nation 1 / 0
Carried

Add extra visa conditions

Aye 31 No 11

Passed 31 to 11. Support came from Labor, Liberal Party, Nationals, Jacqui Lambie Network, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Greens.

16 Nov 2023

This added the government’s further conditions for people released on those visas.

Party Recorded votes Aye / No
Labor 19 / 0
Greens 0 / 11
Liberal Party 7 / 0
Nationals 2 / 0
Independent 1 / 0
Jacqui Lambie Network 1 / 0
One Nation 1 / 0
Carried

Require at least one year in prison

Aye 29 No 12

Passed 29 to 12. Support came from Labor, Liberal Party, Nationals, and One Nation. Opposition came from Greens and minor parties and independents.

16 Nov 2023

This would have added a mandatory minimum jail term to the bill’s offences, but the amendment package was carried in the Senate division record provided here.

Party Recorded votes Aye / No
Labor 19 / 0
Greens 0 / 11
Liberal Party 7 / 0
Nationals 2 / 0
Independent 0 / 1
One Nation 1 / 0
Defeated

Add sunset to bridging visa changes

Aye 12 No 29

Defeated 12 to 29. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, Nationals, and Jacqui Lambie Network.

16 Nov 2023

This would have limited how long the bridging visa changes remained in force, but the Senate rejected the package.

Party Recorded votes Aye / No
Labor 0 / 19
Greens 11 / 0
Liberal Party 0 / 6
Nationals 0 / 2
Independent 1 / 0
Jacqui Lambie Network 0 / 1
One Nation 0 / 1
Carried

Add continuing-offence rule

Aye 31 No 11

Passed 31 to 11. Support came from Labor, Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Greens.

16 Nov 2023

This confirmed the first part of the government amendment package.

Party Recorded votes Aye / No
Labor 17 / 0
Greens 0 / 11
Liberal Party 7 / 0
Unknown 3 / 0
Nationals 2 / 0
Independent 1 / 0
One Nation 1 / 0
Carried

Expand bridging visa conditions and offences

Aye 31 No 11

Passed 31 to 11. Support came from Labor, Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Greens.

16 Nov 2023

This completed the Senate’s agreed government changes to the bill’s conditions framework.

Party Recorded votes Aye / No
Labor 17 / 0
Greens 0 / 11
Liberal Party 7 / 0
Unknown 3 / 0
Nationals 2 / 0
Independent 1 / 0
One Nation 1 / 0

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

Andrew Giles

Australian Labor Party • MP 16 Nov 2023

Giles supports the bill and says it is needed urgently to strengthen monitoring, reporting and other safeguards for people released from detention after the NZYQThe High Court case that forced the government to release some detainees because they could not lawfully be kept in detention on the old basis. decision.

Read in Hansard ↗
Lead opposing voice Opposes

David Shoebridge

Australian Greens • Senator 16 Nov 2023

Shoebridge says the Greens will vote against the bill because it is a cruel, rushed response to the High CourtAustralia's highest court, whose November 2023 orders triggered the changes in this bill. decision that copies Coalition policy and imposes mandatory sentencing on refugees.

Read in Hansard ↗
Lead supporting voice Supports

Pauline Hanson

Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party • Senator 16 Nov 2023

Hanson supports the bill and argues the new bridging visa conditions are sensible safeguards for national security.

Read in Hansard ↗
Lead non-major voice Supports

Zoe Daniel

Independent • MP 16 Nov 2023

Daniel says she will support the bill, but only as a temporary measure to protect the community after the High CourtAustralia's highest court, whose November 2023 orders triggered the changes in this bill. decision and with further changes still expected.

Read in Hansard ↗

All speeches by bloc

Labor

6 speakers · 6 support

  1. Andrew Giles ★ Giles supports the bill and says it is needed urgently to strengthen monitoring, reporting and other safeguards for people released from detention after the NZYQThe High Court case that forced the government to release some detainees because they could not lawfully be kept in detention on the old basis. decision.
    “The measures outlined in this bill are proposed to complement and strengthen existing safeguards.”

    Australian Labor Party • MP • 16 Nov 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  2. Anthony Chisholm Chisholm supports the bill and says it is needed to urgently strengthen monitoring, reporting and other controls on people released after the NZYQThe High Court case that forced the government to release some detainees because they could not lawfully be kept in detention on the old basis. decision so the community is protected while removal is still being worked through.
    “The measures outlined in this Bill are proposed to complement and strengthen existing safeguards.”

    Australian Labor Party • Senator • 16 Nov 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  3. Katy Gallagher Gallagher supports the bill and says it is needed urgently to tighten conditions on NZYQThe High Court case that forced the government to release some detainees because they could not lawfully be kept in detention on the old basis.-affected bridging visa holders, including monitoring, curfews and reporting, to protect the community and keep people engaged for removal.
    “In closing, I note that the High Court's decision has significant implications for immigration compliance and for the community protection objectives of the government. While it is important that we enact this legislation as a priority, further safeguards are being considered. Community protection remains a fundamental priority, and the measures included in this bill are fundamental for providing the legislative framework to support this outcome. I thank other members for their contributions on the bill, and I also acknowledge that there will be amendments to be moved in the committee stage that are being finalised now in discussions between the government and the opposition. I commend the bill to the Senate.”

    Australian Labor Party • Senator • 16 Nov 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  4. Clare O'Neil O'Neil says the government supports the bill and wants it passed quickly because it gives ministers new powers to impose strict visa conditions, monitoring and criminal penalties to manage community safety risks after the High CourtAustralia's highest court, whose November 2023 orders triggered the changes in this bill. decision.
    “I want to thank the parliament for this opportunity to support Minister Giles in putting this bill forward to the parliament. It is part of the government's response to a High Court decision that was made last week. I want to come back to that decision because the Leader of the Opposition has come forward to the parliament and made a series of statements in his speech just now that he knows to be untrue.”

    Australian Labor Party • MP • 16 Nov 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  5. Matt Keogh Keogh supports the bill, saying it strengthens visa conditions, monitoring and offences to keep the community safe after the High CourtAustralia's highest court, whose November 2023 orders triggered the changes in this bill. ruling.
    “I know many people in my community are concerned about this situation. West Australian police and federal authorities are monitoring this very closely. The Albanese government is committed to the rule of law. We are committed to maintaining the integrity of our migration system and keeping the Australian community safe. I am committed to this for my community. This bill delivers on that, and I commend the bill to the House.”

    Australian Labor Party • MP • 16 Nov 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  6. Penny Wong Wong supports the bill and says it should pass quickly because it will make Australians safer by strengthening restrictions and imposing criminal penalties.
    “The government has introduced urgent legislation to strengthen these restrictions and impose criminal penalties which are needed to keep Australians safe.”

    Australian Labor Party • Senator • 16 Nov 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗

Coalition

11 speakers · 12 contributions · 3 support · 5 oppose · 3 mixed

  1. James Paterson James Paterson supports the bill as a necessary response to the High CourtAustralia's highest court, whose November 2023 orders triggered the changes in this bill. ruling, but says it is too weak and leaves the community insufficiently protected.
    “Senator Cash and I will move a number of amendments when we get to the committee stage, because we don't believe this bill goes far enough or sufficiently protects the community. I really hope that the chamber and the government can support those amendments. We haven't had a lot of time to consider them, but nonetheless they have been drafted. We do think they are necessary and offer additional security and protection for the community, and we do hope that the government can sincerely consider these amendments.”

    Liberal Party • Senator • 16 Nov 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  2. Michaelia Cash Michaelia Cash says the coalition will move amendments because the bill is weak and was rushed, but she wants it fixed so it better protects Australians.
    “Therefore, yes, we will be moving amendments in the Senate later on this evening and we will be discussing those amendments with the government.”

    Liberal Party • Senator • 16 Nov 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  3. Peter Dutton Dutton opposes the bill in its current form, saying it was rushed overnight and is totally inadequate to deal with the released offenders.
    “Yet today we have before the parliament urgent legislation that has been drafted overnight to try and provide some response, which is totally and utterly inadequate.”

    Liberal Party • MP • 16 Nov 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  4. Andrew Bragg Andrew Bragg supports the bill, but says it must be strengthened with the coalition's amendments because the government's version is too weak to protect the community and properly monitor serious offenders.
    “I have to say it reminds me a lot of the last time that Labor was the government of Australia. They were very poor when it came to economic management, and, in relation to the management of the migration system, I have to say that the last Labor government lost the confidence of the Australian people on issues like this. So this is a key test for the government. Will they be prepared to entertain some of the very reasonable suggestions that we make in our amendments? It's just not good enough that Australian people should be exposed to murderers and rapists in their day-to-day lives. The bill should be strengthened, and I urge the Senate to take this course of action.”

    Liberal Party • Senator • 16 Nov 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  5. Slade Brockman 2 contributions Brockman says the coalition will support the bill because it is needed to fix the visa loophole exposed by the High CourtAustralia's highest court, whose November 2023 orders triggered the changes in this bill. decision, but he argues it is still too weak and needs strengthening.

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

    Second reading speech Liberal Party • Senator • 16 Nov 2023

    Brockman says the coalition will support the bill because it is needed to fix the visa loophole exposed by the High CourtAustralia's highest court, whose November 2023 orders triggered the changes in this bill. decision, but he argues it is still too weak and needs strengthening. He criticises the government for acting too slowly and for bringing the bill in late with inadequate scrutiny.

    “Of course we will support the bill, but we will also look to strengthen the bill, because it simply isn't strong enough. There are some obvious improvements that can be made that we will be moving. But, as I said, we will ultimately support the legislation. We sincerely hope that the government is serious, as Senator Wong said, about—”
    Read this contribution in Hansard ↗

    Second reading speech Liberal Party • Senator • 16 Nov 2023

    Brockman supports the bill and says urgent legislation was needed after the High CourtAustralia's highest court, whose November 2023 orders triggered the changes in this bill. decision, criticising Labor for delaying a response and putting the community at risk. He also welcomes the government's agreement to sensible amendments from his colleagues.

    “In very brief summary: the Labor Party has shown a complete inability to deal with what is a very important issue in a timely fashion. What we do know is that the Labor Party has had months of notice that this was a risk. The decision was handed down by the High Court a week ago. Those on this side warned about it immediately. I know for a fact that Senator Paterson, the shadow minister for home affairs, warned the next day that urgent legislation was required, and then Labor persisted for a week—basically until yesterday—in insisting that an urgent legislative response was not required. As a result, we saw the Australian community put at risk. That is not an acceptable response from an Australian government, and it is good that we are finally seeing some urgency from those on the other side. We are finally seeing the seriousness of this matter given the attention that it deserves in terms of a legislative response from this chamber. It is also good to see the government agreeing with the sensible amendments put forward by my colleagues. On that note, I will sit down.”
    Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
  6. Dan Tehan Dan Tehan opposes the bill because he says it is too little, too late and does not go far enough to keep the community safe.
    “We just heard the minister for immigration say when he introduced this bill that this is an immediate response. Those were his words—'This is an immediate response.' An immediate response would have taken place last Wednesday before you let them out, not here now. I appeal to the government. What we need to see before this parliament goes anywhere this week is a new regime put in place that allows for preventive detention, which allows for those 84 to be redetained.”

    Liberal Party • MP • 16 Nov 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  7. Keith Pitt Pitt says the opposition sees the bill as rushed and inadequate, and wants amendments before it can be improved enough to support.
    “This parliament deals with difficult issues. That is why we were elected. We were sent to this place to represent the interests of our communities and the Australian people. The Labor government rolled this through this morning with such little notice—it was 7.15 am—for our people to get across this bill without the ability to consult with others. It is just outrageous. How is it possible, firstly, that it has taken this long and, secondly, that it is being done in such a short time that we have little time to consult with individuals who could put forward changes? We now find that that is blocked and we can't even do that. So the Labor government, firstly, failed to act; secondly, said yesterday that there was nothing that could be done here; thirdly, rolled up today with this proposition; and, fourthly, said the opposition can't put forward amendments, changes and better propositions. This bill will go to the Senate, where it will be debated and, as the Leader of the Opposition said this morning, we will attempt once again to put forward what we think are improvements.”

    National Party • MP • 16 Nov 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  8. Keith Wolahan Wolahan opposes the bill, saying it was rushed, poorly drafted and not strong enough to keep the community safe.
    “The bill as proposed—I've only just got it for the first time here—hasn't had a chance to be considered properly. The amendments that we have and would like to debate with you haven't been properly considered. I note here that the Australian public might think that we know there are serious criminals who are about to be released and the government is proposing a regime that will keep you safe. The proposals here are about breaches of visa conditions and include things like ankle bracelets and consequences for not doing what the terms and conditions of a visa say. Sentencing practices have changed in the last few decades. You might think that a breach of one of those conditions is going to lead to a serious criminal being put in jail, but that's not how sentencing practices work in Australian courts at the moment. Breaching a condition like that isn't an automatic visit to your local prison. It doesn't take you off the streets. It doesn't protect people.”

    Liberal Party • MP • 16 Nov 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  9. David Coleman David Coleman opposes the bill, saying the government waited months to act and then brought forward a weak measure that does not go far enough to protect the community.
    “We see them come in today with the Migration Amendment (Bridging Visa Conditions) Bill 2023. A few days ago they were saying, 'Look, there's nothing else that we can do,' despite having had six months to think about it. A couple of days later, they're saying, 'Well, there is something we can do, so we're to going bring something in.' But the bill they bring into parliament is weak and ineffectual and goes nowhere near far enough.”

    Liberal Party • MP • 16 Nov 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  10. Andrew Hastie Hastie opposes the bill, saying it is a rushed, half-baked response to the High CourtAustralia's highest court, whose November 2023 orders triggered the changes in this bill. decision and that the government had months to prepare proper protections for the community.
    “Even now, with this half-baked legislation, I don't have any assurance that the Australian people are going to be kept safe. We don't have any assurance that the Australian people are going to be kept safe. This government should hang its head in shame.”

    Liberal Party • MP • 16 Nov 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  11. Luke Howarth Howarth says the opposition is frustrated that the bill has been rushed and that the coalition is not being allowed to move tougher amendments.
    “This government could have made tougher legislation back in June. We're now in November. Nothing was done. No amendments are able to be put forward by the coalition. What are they afraid of with tougher amendments? What is it? The community expects the coalition, a decent opposition, to put forward amendments, but the Albanese Labor government are not allowing that to be done, to the shame of the Albanese Labor government. The Australian community need to know that. They do need to know that this parliament isn't being treated with the respect it deserves. This is totally being rushed at the last minute. This could have been introduced on Monday. We're now on Thursday. Nothing had been done.”

    Liberal Party • MP • 16 Nov 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗

Greens

5 speakers · 5 oppose

  1. David Shoebridge ★ Shoebridge says the Greens will vote against the bill because it is a cruel, rushed response to the High CourtAustralia's highest court, whose November 2023 orders triggered the changes in this bill. decision that copies Coalition policy and imposes mandatory sentencing on refugees.
    “So of course we're going to vote against this bill. But, of course, the combined parties of cruelty are going to come together and ram it through without any committee process, without the benefit of the reasons for the decision of the High Court, because that's what you do.”

    Australian Greens • Senator • 16 Nov 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  2. Nick McKim McKim says the Greens will oppose the bill because it gives the minister sweeping new powers to impose curfews and electronic monitoringA way of checking where a person is and whether they are following visa conditions, usually through a tracking device and reporting rules. on noncitizens, including people who have not been convicted of a crime.
    “I've seen some rubbish come through parliaments in my two decades as an MP. This one is right up there with the worst, foulest, most disgusting legislative rubbish I have seen in my two decades in the parliament. The Australian Greens will proudly oppose this bill.”

    Australian Greens • Senator • 16 Nov 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  3. Mehreen Faruqi Faruqi opposes the bill, saying it would again put refugees and stateless people released from detention into a precarious position and punish them on the basis of visa status rather than conduct.
    “Under this bill, refugees and stateless persons who were released into the community as a result of a High Court decision which found indefinite detention was unlawful and unconstitutional will be placed in a precarious position yet again, where they are judged and sentenced not by the court of law but by the stroke of a politician's pen.”

    Australian Greens • Senator • 16 Nov 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  4. Sarah Hanson-Young Sarah Hanson-Young says the Greens will oppose the bill because it is a rushed, fear-driven attack on refugees that follows Peter Dutton's pressure rather than the rule of law.
    “This is a bad bill. It will be found to be bad in years to come, perhaps only in weeks and months to come. The High Court will not be happy, because they have understood that locking people up without trial, without reason, without a judgement is wrong.”

    Australian Greens • Senator • 16 Nov 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  5. Adam Bandt Bandt opposes the bill, saying Labor has rushed through anti-refugee laws in response to the High CourtAustralia's highest court, whose November 2023 orders triggered the changes in this bill. and is trying to silence proper debate.
    “We cannot be party to rushing legislation through parliament that we've seen for the first time this morning and that has serious constitutional implications, when this should be the subject of sober consideration by this parliament on a matter as important as this—and you may end up with legislation that everyone in this parliament can support. But, when you try and silence even people who say, 'We want to have a debate about it', and when Labor silences any debate on the deal that they've done with the Liberals because they've been spooked by the Liberals, that is a dark day in this parliament.”

    Australian Greens • MP • 16 Nov 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗

One Nation

1 speaker · 1 support

  1. Pauline Hanson ★ Hanson supports the bill and argues the new bridging visa conditions are sensible safeguards for national security.
    “That's the financial circumstances. That's not setting them up. There is nothing in this bill that is actually detrimental to them being caught out, so that is an absolutely ridiculous statement from Senator McKim.”

    Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party • Senator • 16 Nov 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗

Minor parties and independents

1 speaker · 1 support

  1. Zoe Daniel ★ Daniel says she will support the bill, but only as a temporary measure to protect the community after the High CourtAustralia's highest court, whose November 2023 orders triggered the changes in this bill. decision and with further changes still expected.
    “I hear the concerns of refugee advocates who worry about overreach. This is an extremely fine balance. On balance, I will support the bill in the knowledge that there will be further changes to it when the High Court publishes its reasons in the new year. I want to say very clearly here that indefinite detention is fundamentally wrong. This was always going to happen. This government and the previous government should have been prepared for this. Now the High Court has forced the issue. We must now work to protect our communities, while adhering to basic human rights for people who are refugees. This legislation must be neither misused by the government nor weaponised by an opposition that plays politics with people's lives.”

    Independent • MP • 16 Nov 2023

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗

Record

Full record

Full chat