Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1)

Current status

This bill became law on May 31st, 2024.

Policy area

Law, justice & rights

What does this bill do?

Australia replaces the old Administrative Appeals TribunalThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. across 138 Commonwealth lawsA federal law of Australia; the bill updates references across 138 of these laws so they point to the new tribunal. with the Administrative Review TribunalThe new federal body that takes over most external reviews of government decisions from the AAT., so people can keep using external merits reviewA review where a separate body looks again at the facts, law and fairness of a government decision, not just whether a rule was followed. when government decisions affect them.

Why was it introduced?

Replacing the Administrative Appeals TribunalThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. left 138 Commonwealth lawsA federal law of Australia; the bill updates references across 138 of these laws so they point to the new tribunal. and existing review cases needing updates so external merits reviewA review where a separate body looks again at the facts, law and fairness of a government decision, not just whether a rule was followed. could keep working. This bill swaps in the new Administrative Review TribunalThe new federal body that takes over most external reviews of government decisions from the AAT., moves AATThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. matters across automatically, and keeps special review rules for migration, refugee, tax and charity cases.

Broader context

Australia’s federal merits reviewA review where a separate body looks again at the facts, law and fairness of a government decision, not just whether a rule was followed. system had long run through the Administrative Appeals TribunalThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across., but by 2024 the government argued the AATThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. was no longer fit for purpose, citing a growing backlog, ageing case-management systems and concerns about appointments, while the replacement tribunal also required dozens of laws to be updated so review rights would keep working. This bill responded by replacing AATThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. references across 138 Commonwealth acts, moving existing cases into the new Administrative Review TribunalThe new federal body that takes over most external reviews of government decisions from the AAT. and folding former Immigration Assessment AuthorityThe older review body for some protection visa cases, which this bill removes so those matters go into the ordinary tribunal path. matters into ordinary tribunal review, before becoming law as part of the wider tribunal overhaul in May 2024.

Key criticism

Critics said the bill either moved too fast for proper parliamentary scrutiny or still kept harsher migration and refugee review rules that could leave some applicants with a less fair process. Those objections came from the Coalition in the House and from crossbench criticism led by Kylea Tink, while most speakers otherwise supported the wider tribunal overhaul.

Who supported it?

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

Introduced in House 07 Dec 2023
Passed House 21 Mar 2024
Passed Senate 16 May 2024 Aye 34 No 24
Became law 31 May 2024

Did it become law?

Yes

Became law 31 May 2024

Final passage

Recorded final vote

1 counted final-passage vote was recorded.

Passage speed

176 days

From introduction to the latest recorded parliamentary step

Official record

View on APH

Parliament of Australia bill page

What does this bill do?

  1. Australia replaces the old Administrative Appeals TribunalThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. across 138 Commonwealth lawsA federal law of Australia; the bill updates references across 138 of these laws so they point to the new tribunal. with the Administrative Review TribunalThe new federal body that takes over most external reviews of government decisions from the AAT., so people can keep using external merits reviewA review where a separate body looks again at the facts, law and fairness of a government decision, not just whether a rule was followed. when government decisions affect them.

  2. Protection visaA visa for people seeking asylum or refugee protection, which is why these cases get special rules in the bill. applicants who were previously sent to the Immigration Assessment AuthorityThe older review body for some protection visa cases, which this bill removes so those matters go into the ordinary tribunal path. will instead get the ordinary tribunal review process, bringing them into the same review stream as other protection visaA visa for people seeking asylum or refugee protection, which is why these cases get special rules in the bill. applicants.

  3. Migration and refugee reviews keep some special rules, including private hearings for protection cases and tighter deadlines in some visa matters, to move cases faster while keeping key fairness protections.

  4. Tax and charity disputes keep stricter tribunal rules, including a 60-day application period and privacy protections, to protect confidential information and avoid disrupting tax administration.

  5. People with current AATThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. matters will have their cases moved automatically to the new tribunal, and many staff and some members will move across so reviews can continue without people reapplying.

Show source excerpts
  1. The Consequential Bill supports the ART Bill by repealing the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) (AAT Act), making consequential amendments across 138 Commonwealth Acts and providing transitional rules which facilitate the smooth transition from the AAT to the Tribunal.
    Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) explanatory memorandum
  2. Repealing Part 7AA, together with the transitional arrangements in Schedule 16, provides that these applicants have access to the usual processes for review of protection decisions in the Tribunal. These provisions promote the right to an effective remedy and a fair and public hearing.
    Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) explanatory memorandum
  3. The schedule repeals Part 7 of the Migration Act to provide for more effective and efficient reviews of migration and protection visa decisions. The amendments in the Schedule do so by providing a single, harmonised process for the review of migration and protection visa decisions in Part 5 of the Act. The provisions retain and enhance special features that are fundamental to the operation of Tribunal review for migration and refugee matters, including provisions that disapply or apply instead of, or in addition to, provisions of the ART Bill. These provisions recognise the distinct nature of these applications and their volume and complexity. The Schedule includes provisions:
    Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) explanatory memorandum
  4. The amendments retain special provisions that are fundamental to the operation of Tribunal review for tax and charity matters, including provisions that disapply – or apply instead of – provisions of the ART Bill. These provisions ensure the workability of these frameworks, protect tax revenue collection and uphold longstanding core tax principles and practices. The schedule includes provisions:
    Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) explanatory memorandum
  5. It provides clarity by ensuring that applications that have already been made to the AAT, or proceedings already in progress, will automatically transfer to the new tribunal when it commences operations. Parties with matters in the tribunal at the time of transition will be notified, and will not need to reapply to have their matter continue.
    Second reading speech

Broader context for this bill

Australia’s federal merits reviewA review where a separate body looks again at the facts, law and fairness of a government decision, not just whether a rule was followed. system had long run through the Administrative Appeals TribunalThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across., but by 2024 the government argued the AATThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. was no longer fit for purpose, citing a growing backlog, ageing case-management systems and concerns about appointments, while the replacement tribunal also required dozens of laws to be updated so review rights would keep working. This bill responded by replacing AATThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. references across 138 Commonwealth acts, moving existing cases into the new Administrative Review TribunalThe new federal body that takes over most external reviews of government decisions from the AAT. and folding former Immigration Assessment AuthorityThe older review body for some protection visa cases, which this bill removes so those matters go into the ordinary tribunal path. matters into ordinary tribunal review, before becoming law as part of the wider tribunal overhaul in May 2024.

  1. 01 July 1976

    Administrative Appeals TribunalThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. begins operating

    The AATThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. became the main federal body for independent merits reviewA review where a separate body looks again at the facts, law and fairness of a government decision, not just whether a rule was followed. of government decisions, creating the system this bill later had to replace and carry across.

    Hansard ↗
  2. 07 Dec 2023

    Government introduces bill to update 138 Commonwealth lawsA federal law of Australia; the bill updates references across 138 of these laws so they point to the new tribunal.

    The second reading speech said the new tribunal could not work properly unless 138 acts were amended and existing AATThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. matters were transitioned into the replacement body.

    Hansard ↗
  3. 20 Mar 2024

    Parliament hears case that the AATThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. is not fit for purpose

    During debate, government speakers said the inherited AATThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. faced a large backlog, ageing electronic systems and appointment problems, framing the practical pressure for a full replacement rather than minor fixes.

    Hansard ↗
  4. 21 Mar 2024

    House passes the bill

    The House approved the measure after considering amendments, keeping the broader tribunal replacement package moving and locking in the planned transfer of review pathways and live cases.

    Parliamentary timeline ↗
  5. 16 May 2024

    Parliament passes the bill

    Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing the legislative changes needed to swap AATThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. references to the new tribunal across most of its caseload.

    Parliamentary timeline ↗
  6. 31 May 2024

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

    Royal AssentThe final step that turns a bill passed by Parliament into an Act of Parliament. turned the bill into law, allowing existing AATThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. cases, staff transfers and the new Administrative Review TribunalThe new federal body that takes over most external reviews of government decisions from the AAT. review arrangements to proceed under the wider reform.

    Parliamentary timeline ↗

How did it move through Parliament?

House Senate
Introduced 07 Dec 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 07 Dec 2023

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

Second reading moved

House of Representatives Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs; Committee report (23/02/2024) review 14 Dec 2023

Referred to Committee (14/12/2023): House of Representatives Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs; Committee report (23/02/2024)

Referred to committee

APH bill page notes
Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (13/05/2024) review 08 Feb 2024

Referred to Committee (08/02/2024): Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (13/05/2024)

Referred to committee

APH bill page notes
Second reading debate 19 Mar 2024

The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.

Second reading debate 20 Mar 2024

The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.

Second reading debate 21 Mar 2024

The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.

House second reading agreed 21 Mar 2024

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 agreed to amendment packages 21 Mar 2024

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

Consideration in detail debate

House third reading agreed 21 Mar 2024

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

Third reading agreed to

Introduced 25 Mar 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 25 Mar 2024

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 15 May 2024

The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.

Senate second reading agreed Aye 35 No 25 16 May 2024

Recorded vote: 35 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 third reading agreed Aye 34 No 24 16 May 2024

Recorded vote: 34 to 24.

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

Third reading agreed to

Passed both houses 16 May 2024

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

Finally passed both Houses

Assent 31 May 2024

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

The main case against this bill

Critics said the bill either moved too fast for proper parliamentary scrutiny or still kept harsher migration and refugee review rules that could leave some applicants with a less fair process. Those objections came from the Coalition in the House and from crossbench criticism led by Kylea Tink, while most speakers otherwise supported the wider tribunal overhaul.

Most criticism focused on process and retained migration settings, not on ending the old AATThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. itself.

Rushed scrutiny

The main procedural criticism was that the government pushed a large tribunal reform package through too quickly, without enough inquiry or parliamentary scrutiny for changes of this scale.

Raised by Coalition speakers in the House, especially Gavin Pearce Source ↗

Unfair migration and refugee procedures kept

A substantive criticism was that the bill still preserved separate, more restrictive procedures for some migration and refugee matters, instead of putting those applicants fully into the same tribunal process as others.

Raised by Crossbench criticism led by Kylea Tink; also reflected in a defeated amendment in the Senate Source ↗

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.

21 Mar 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 34 No 24

Passed 34 to 24. Support came from Labor, Greens, One Nation, 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 3 / 5
Nationals 0 / 3
Independent 2 / 0
One Nation 1 / 0
UAP 0 / 1

Earlier bill-stage votes

Carried

Senate cleared second reading

Aye 35 No 25

Passed 35 to 25. Support came from Labor, Greens, One Nation, 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 / 16
Greens 11 / 0
Unknown 3 / 5
Independent 3 / 0
Nationals 0 / 3
One Nation 1 / 0
UAP 0 / 1

Amendments at a glance

Amendments grouped by chamber. Where APH reports aggregate counts, the package card summarizes the matching public amendment sheets by source theme.

House

Defeated

Call for equal migration review rules

Aye 13 No 54

Defeated 13 to 54. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor and Nationals. Minor-party and independent votes were split.

21 Mar 2024

It was a statement of opposition to keeping a separate migration review code, not a change to the bill text itself.

Party Recorded votes Aye / No
Labor 0 / 47
Unknown 6 / 6
Independent 6 / 0
Greens 1 / 0
Nationals 0 / 1
Defeated

Tell applicants next steps

Aye 14 No 48

Defeated 14 to 48. Support came from Greens, Centre Alliance, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor and Liberal Party. Minor-party and independent votes were split.

21 Mar 2024

It aimed to make migration review notices clearer and more usable for applicants, especially people facing language and accessibility barriers.

Party Recorded votes Aye / No
Labor 0 / 42
Unknown 6 / 5
Independent 6 / 0
Greens 1 / 0
Centre Alliance 1 / 0
Liberal Party 0 / 1
Defeated

Update migration transition rules

Aye 14 No 43

Defeated 14 to 43. Support came from Greens, Centre Alliance, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor and Nationals. Minor-party and independent votes were split.

21 Mar 2024

It was a broad technical and transitional package to make the new tribunal framework work across multiple parts of the bill.

Party Recorded votes Aye / No
Labor 0 / 36
Unknown 6 / 5
Independent 6 / 0
Nationals 0 / 2
Greens 1 / 0
Centre Alliance 1 / 0
Carried

Government package: 95 amendments

Government amendments clarify second review and guidance-and-appeals panel provisions, tighten commencement timing for transitional appointments, and adjust migration notice and assistance rules so the bill operates consistently across the tribunal transition.

21 Mar 2024

Passed on the voices

The chamber agreed to this amendment package without a counted vote. APH records the agreed count by amendment, while the source documents are grouped into amendment sheets.

Themes in the public amendment sheets

Senate

Carried

Expand confidentiality and reporting rules

Aye 35 No 25

Passed 35 to 25. Support came from Labor, Greens, One Nation, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and UAP. Minor-party and independent votes were split.

16 May 2024

This amended the bill before final passage by adding cross-act confidentiality coverage and a systemic-issues reporting duty.

Party Recorded votes Aye / No
Labor 17 / 0
Liberal Party 0 / 16
Greens 11 / 0
Unknown 3 / 5
Independent 3 / 0
Nationals 0 / 3
One Nation 1 / 0
UAP 0 / 1
Defeated

Call for equal migration review rules

Aye 13 No 44

Defeated 13 to 44. Support came from Greens and One Nation. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, Nationals, UAP, and minor parties and independents. Minor-party and independent votes were split.

16 May 2024

It was a statement of opposition to keeping a separate migration review code, not a change to the bill text itself.

Party Recorded votes Aye / No
Labor 0 / 17
Liberal Party 0 / 16
Greens 11 / 0
Unknown 0 / 7
Independent 1 / 1
Nationals 0 / 2
One Nation 1 / 0
UAP 0 / 1
Defeated

Senate amendment defeated

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.

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

Who spoke, and what they said

Start here — lead voices

Sponsor speech Supports

Mark Dreyfus

Australian Labor Party • MP 07 Dec 2023

Dreyfus supports the bill, saying it makes the consequential and transitional changes needed to establish the new Administrative Review TribunalThe new federal body that takes over most external reviews of government decisions from the AAT. and transfer cases, staff and records smoothly.

Read in Hansard ↗
Lead opposing voice Opposes

Hollie Hughes

Liberal Party • Senator 15 May 2024

Hollie Hughes opposes the bill, saying it is a costly rebrand of the tribunal backed by a deal with the Greens and designed to clear out non-Labor appointees.

Read in Hansard ↗
Lead supporting voice Supports

Alex Hawke

Liberal Party • MP 20 Mar 2024

Hawke says he will not oppose the bill, but argues it is mostly a rebadging exercise that leaves the same backlog and does little real reform.

Read in Hansard ↗
Lead non-major voice Supports

Allegra Spender

Independent • MP 20 Mar 2024

Spender supports the bill and welcomes its creation of the new tribunal and a merit-based appointmentsA process for choosing tribunal members based on qualifications and suitability rather than political favour. process, but says the migration and refugee carve-outs risk creating unfair two-tier rules.

Read in Hansard ↗

All speeches by bloc

Labor

25 speakers · 27 contributions · 25 support

  1. Carol Brown Brown supports the bill as part of the wider tribunal overhaul, saying the package will abolish the AATThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. and replace it with a new, improved Administrative Review TribunalThe new federal body that takes over most external reviews of government decisions from the AAT..
    “I table revised explanatory memoranda relating to Administrative Review Tribunal Bill 2024 and the Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) Bill 2023. I move:”

    Australian Labor Party • Senator • 25 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  2. Graham Perrett Graham Perrett supports the bill, saying it will help create a fairer and more trusted review system by improving transparency, merit-based appointmentsA process for choosing tribunal members based on qualifications and suitability rather than political favour., and the transition to the new tribunal.
    “The supporting consequential and transition bill will amend 138 Commonwealth acts to ensure that existing legislation supports the intentions of the new tribunal. It will also streamline reviews of migration and refugee decisions by removing the Immigration Assessment Authority so that these processes are more efficient. The bill continues to recognise the unique features of veterans' entitlement law, with maintenance of the merits review in both ART and Veterans' Review Board. To minimise disruption and delay from the changeover from the AAT, active, pending and potential cases and those currently before the courts will be transitioned to the Administrative Review Tribunal.”

    Australian Labor Party • MP • 20 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  3. Shayne Neumann Shayne Neumann strongly supports the bill, saying it is needed to replace the failed AATThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. with a fairer, more transparent review body and to implement key reform recommendations.
    “We're picking up recommendations from the royal commission here, and it's important that we do. That's why I'm so supportive of this legislation. Those opposite are a disgrace. They're disingenuous about this legislation. They know the system's not working. They knew it in government, they know it in opposition and they should be supporting the bill.”

    Australian Labor Party • MP • 19 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  4. Fiona Phillips Phillips supports the bill, saying the tribunal reforms will replace a compromised AATThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. with a fairer, more independent review system.
    “To conclude, in this House, we are elected to serve and support our constituents, and that means where there is something that is not working or not serving its purpose we should make changes. That's what we're doing with these amendments to the Administrative Review Tribunal Bill 2023 and Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) Bill 2023. All of our constituents deserve a fair review system. Whether it's a Centrelink matter, a NDIS matter, a visa matter or a veteran's matter, constituents must have access to a fair and transparent review process. I commend these bills to the house.”

    Australian Labor Party • MP • 20 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  5. Alicia Payne Alicia Payne supports the bill and says it is an important reform to replace the discredited AATThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. with a trusted, accessible and independent review tribunal.
    “When we came to government, the AAT was in disarray. This bill is an important reform and a really important step towards restoring trust in our institutions.”

    Australian Labor Party • MP • 20 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  6. Julian Hill Hill supports the bill as part of the tribunal overhaul, saying it will transfer existing matters without interruption and help restore trust in a fair, transparent and merit-based review system.
    “The bill will also re-create the Administrative Review Council, which Tony Abbott shamefully abolished. All matters before the AAT when the new tribunal is in place will automatically be transferred across. There will be no break in continuity; Australians won't need to relodge their appeals.”

    Australian Labor Party • MP • 20 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  7. David Smith Smith supports the bill as part of the Albanese government’s overhaul of administrative review, saying it restores trust by replacing the AATThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. with a more independent, merit-based and user-focused tribunal.
    “This legislation is another part of doing just that, and I will expand on this shortly.”

    Australian Labor Party • MP • 20 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  8. Tania Lawrence Lawrence supports the bill, saying it is needed to fix the tribunal’s backlog, delays, weak finances and appointment process so the new review body can restore public confidence.
    “This bill creates the environment within which these ideals will be preserved. It is aimed at fixing a number of ills by ensuring a merit based selection, by putting the ART on a sustainable financial basis, by dealing with backlog and avoiding unconscionable delays—delays, too, are injustice—and by improving the case management systems.”

    Australian Labor Party • MP • 20 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  9. Brian Mitchell Brian Mitchell supports the bill and says it is needed to replace the discredited AATThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. with a new review body that is independent, fair, accessible and merit based.
    “The bill before us today implements this commitment to establish a new federal administrative review body, the Administrative Review Tribunal, which will replace the AAT. So the AAT will be replaced by the ART. The establishment of this new administrative review body—which is user focused, efficient, accessible, independent and fair—is a key part of the government's commitment to restoring trust and confidence in Australia's system of administrative review.”

    Australian Labor Party • MP • 20 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  10. Josh Burns Burns supports the bill, saying it is needed to replace the AATThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. with a tribunal built on merit, independence and public trust.
    “This bill is about ensuring that the AAT is replaced by a body that ensures integrity, independence, experience and accountability and builds public trust.”

    Australian Labor Party • MP • 20 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  11. Josh Wilson Wilson strongly supports the bill as part of restoring a high-quality, transparent Administrative Review TribunalThe new federal body that takes over most external reviews of government decisions from the AAT. after the former government let the AATThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. deteriorate.
    “We are not going to allow that to continue to be the case. In barely two years of government we've taken on the clean-up task in a whole range of areas. This is one of them. Australians deserve, and must have, a high-integrity, high-quality, transparent, fair and timely review process that they can have access to when they receive a very impactful decision from a government agency in some of the areas I've mentioned. That is what we are going to ensure is the case by providing the resources for the new Administrative Review Tribunal and, crucially, changing some of the settings around the way in which people are appointed, to make that absolutely a transparent and merit based process to make sure that where possible reviews are reported—I said before that justice delayed is justice denied.”

    Australian Labor Party • MP • 20 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  12. Daniel Mulino Mulino supports the bill and says it will replace the old tribunal with a stronger system that restores merit-based appointmentsA process for choosing tribunal members based on qualifications and suitability rather than political favour. and reduces the damage done under the previous government.
    “I'm pleased today to rise to speak in favour of the Administrative Review Tribunal Bill 2023, the Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) Bill 2023 and the Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 2) Bill 2024. These are very important bills that will replace the Administrative Appeals Tribunal with a new and improved Administrative Review Tribunal. This is a very important reform in strengthening and improving the federal system of administrative review and is arguably the most important review of this system in some decades.”

    Australian Labor Party • MP • 20 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  13. Gordon Reid Reid supports the bill and says it will replace the discredited Administrative Appeals TribunalThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. with a more user-focused, efficient, accessible and merit-based system.
    “This bill implements the Labor government's commitment to establish this new federal administrative review body. The new body will be called the Administrative Review Tribunal and will replace the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, which, as we all know, under the former government significantly failed Australians, particularly on the New South Wales Central Coast. The ART Bill builds on 50 years of experience, learning and broad consultation to establish a tribunal that is user focused, efficient, accessible, independent and fair. The ART bill implements all three recommendations from the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee review into the performance and integrity of Australia's administrative review system, four recommendations from the Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme and the government's response to two recommendations from the Rapid review into the exploitation of Australia's visa system.”

    Australian Labor Party • MP • 20 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  14. Jerome Laxale Laxale supports the bill and says it will replace the failing AATThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. with a fairer, faster and more independent review body.
    “Unlike those opposite, the Albanese government is taking decisive action to address these longstanding challenges. We're not leaving this in the too-hard basket. By introducing this bill, we are laying the groundwork for a system that will seek to serve the Australian people. Through these reforms, we are not just changing how the tribunal will operate; we are affirming our commitment to justice, transparency and democracy. I commend them to the House.”

    Australian Labor Party • MP • 20 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  15. Libby Coker Coker supports the bill, saying it is the necessary machinery to replace the old tribunal with the new system by repealing the AATThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. Act, updating Commonwealth lawsA federal law of Australia; the bill updates references across 138 of these laws so they point to the new tribunal. and preserving workable rules for tax, migration, social security and veterans matters.
    “The consequential and transitional bill repeals the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975, to be replaced by the tribunal established by the ART Bill. It amends 138 Commonwealth acts to ensure that existing legislation operates as intended for the new tribunal, updates hundreds of references across the Commonwealth statute book, and streamlines the various regimes that currently apply to review of matters in the tribunal. In particular, the bill retains essential modifications to the operation of the merits review framework for tax and charity matters which ensures the workability of these frameworks and protection of tax revenue collection or otherwise upholds longstanding core tax principles and practices.”

    Australian Labor Party • MP • 20 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  16. Susan Templeman Susan Templeman supports the bill, saying it is meant to restore integrity and public confidence in administrative review after the failures of the old tribunal.
    “This bill, for me, is about restoring integrity in the system. My community expects that. The AAT is one of the bodies that they had no faith in. They had no faith that, if they were a child-support payer or recipient and they took an issue through the processes of the child-support agency and then were dissatisfied with how it was handled and therefore went to the AAT for an independent expert review, what would come out the other end would be fair and just. That was the same for all the different areas that the AAT covers—everything from family assistance, paid parental leave, social security and student assistance to taxation matters, migration and refugee visa issues and visa related decisions, Australian citizenship decisions, bankruptcy decisions, civil aviation matters, freedom-of-information matters and the National Disability Insurance Scheme, which would be the one where we, from my office, have seen the greatest flow-through of matters to the AAT. So I think it's vital that this institution is given some credibility again, and I'm very pleased that the legislation and the circulated amendments that are before us are going to provide something that Australians can have faith in and have confidence in.”

    Australian Labor Party • MP • 20 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  17. Carina Garland Garland supports the bill and says it is the government’s long-needed reform to replace the old tribunal with a system that is more efficient, accessible, independent and fair.
    “I'm very proud to speak in support of this today.”

    Australian Labor Party • MP • 20 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  18. Joanne Ryan Ryan says Labor supports the bill because it will replace the discredited AATThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. with a more independent, efficient and merit-based tribunal that restores public trust in administrative review.
    “I encourage those opposite today to support this bill in the House so that good governance can be trusted by the Australian public and so that people in my electorate and electorates around the country will believe, if there is a decision made, that they have a right of appeal to a trusted source where they will get a fair go. It's pretty simple. For the life of me, I cannot understand why anyone in this House would oppose this legislation.”

    Australian Labor Party • MP • 20 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  19. Zaneta Mascarenhas Mascarenhas says Labor supports the bill and wants it passed because it will fix the failures of the old tribunal system and make administrative review more accessible, fair and effective.
    “That's why it's important that we can all contribute to this important debate. It reaffirms our commitment to providing a simple, affordable and accessible system for the review of government decisions. It's a testament to our dedication to upholding democratic principles. It's a testament to ensuring our accountability in decision-making. It's a testament to Labor's principles to make systems accessible to all: impartiality, fairness and equity. These are all principles that I stand by. These are principles that the Labor Party stands by. In conclusion, I urge all members of the parliament to support these bills. I commend the bills to the House.”

    Australian Labor Party • MP • 20 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  20. Sally Sitou Sally Sitou supports the bill and says it will rebuild public trust by replacing the old tribunal with a merit-based, independent system.
    “This bill does the hard work of rebuilding public trust in our key institutions—the very foundation of our democracy depends on it. Surely that is something that everyone in this place can get behind. For the sake of all Australians, it's time to recognise and reward merit, not mateship.”

    Australian Labor Party • MP • 20 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  21. Maria Vamvakinou Vamvakinou supports the bill as part of the move to replace the AATThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across., saying the new review system will be more efficient, accessible, independent and fair.
    “Under this government's legislation, the tribunal will finally have transparent, merit based appointment processes for the appointment of members. It will be informed by the operational needs of the tribunal to ensure that only the highest-quality members are appointed to these very important roles. This is in stark contrast to the former government, which, as it became evident, believed in jobs for Liberal mates, at the expense of our constituents, fairness and a merit based selection process. This is a welcome contrast—an effective, clear and just difference through the provision of an independent mechanism of a review which is fair and just. It resolves applications in a timely manner and with as little formality and expense as is consistent with reaching the correct or preferrable decision. It is accessible and responsive to the diverse needs of parties. It improves the transparency and quality of decision-making and promotes public trust and confidence in the tribunal. On those grounds, I commend the bills to the House.”

    Australian Labor Party • MP • 20 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  22. Cassandra Fernando Fernando supports the bill as part of the shift from the AATThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. to the new Administrative Review TribunalThe new federal body that takes over most external reviews of government decisions from the AAT., saying the transitional rules are needed to move cases smoothly and protect applicants' access to justice.
    “The bill before us today is a crucial component of this broader reform agenda as it seeks to provide the necessary transitional and consequential provisions to facilitate the smooth transition from the old AAT to the new ART.”

    Australian Labor Party • MP • 20 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  23. Sharon Claydon Claydon supports the bill as part of the package replacing the discredited AATThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. with a new Administrative Review TribunalThe new federal body that takes over most external reviews of government decisions from the AAT..
    “It's with great pleasure that I rise to speak in support of the Albanese Labor government's Administrative Review Tribunal Bill 2023. This bill is being debated with two consequential bills in a cognate debate: the Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) Bill 2023 and the Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 2) Bill 2024. Collectively, these three bills will abolish the, sadly, now much discredited Administrative Appeals Tribunal and replace it with a new and much improved Administrative Review Tribunal.”

    Australian Labor Party • MP • 20 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  24. Kate Thwaites Thwaites supports the bill, saying it is a sensible and carefully consulted reform that will replace a tribunal the government says was compromised and no longer fit for purpose.
    “It is entirely appropriate that the Attorney-General has consulted widely and that the Attorney-General has taken action to put together what will be a new reformed body. In passing this legislation through this House, we, as a parliament, are saying that Australians should expect better, that Australians should be confident that this type of institution is free from political interference and is set up to serve the interests of people who most need it, and that is what people will get through this bill and through this work that the government is doing.”

    Australian Labor Party • MP • 20 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗

Coalition

8 speakers · 1 support · 6 oppose · 1 mixed

  1. Paul Scarr Scarr opposes the bill, saying it was rushed, poorly scrutinised and included changes to compensation that he считает unnecessary and bad public policy.
    “I generally believe this was unnecessary and unworthy—the loss of office compensation direction of our independent Remuneration Tribunal being overridden by this bill. Our independent Remuneration Tribunal has independently decided that, when something like this happens, this is what someone who loses their office should be paid, and this bill is introducing a different compensation scheme.”

    Liberal Party • Senator • 15 May 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  2. Dave Sharma Dave Sharma says he will oppose the bill because he thinks the government has not made the case for abolishing the AATThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across. and replacing it with a new tribunal.
    “I say again that the case here has not been made for the abolition of the AAT. Certainly there are arguments to be made for its reform and improvement. But, if you look at its performance as measured against its own performance benchmarks, its annual report and the degree of satisfaction from existing stakeholders, the best case you can make is that reforms and incremental improvements can be made. But to undertake a risky process like this—because setting up an entirely new body carries risks—to go to the expense of $1 billion, as announced in the budget last night, and to risk the loss of expertise, jurisprudence speciality and everything else that the AAT has built up over a number of years is an irresponsible and reckless course to be taking. That is why I will be opposing this legislation.”

    Liberal Party • Senator • 15 May 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  3. Keith Wolahan Wolahan says the coalition is not opposed in principle to the tribunal reforms, but argues this bill and the wider package need proper scrutiny and raises a possible constitutional problem with a serving judge as president.
    “The coalition is not opposed in principle to review of the system—we should review it regularly and make sure it is fit for purpose and that it is an institution that has all the legislation requirements it needs in order to give an accessible and fair system of merits review.”

    Liberal Party • MP • 20 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  4. Gavin Pearce Pearce says the coalition will not support the bill in the House because the government rushed the reform package and did not give it proper scrutiny.
    “I conclude that the coalition will not be supporting these bills in this place if they go to a vote this week, I can tell you that. The process has been a farce, and we are not prepared to sign off on any major reforms without appropriate scrutiny. We will reserve our position in the Senate, and I thank the House.”

    Liberal Party • MP • 19 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  5. Perin Davey Davey opposes the bill, saying the government is wasting about $1 billion to abolish a functioning tribunal and replace it with effectively the same body under new appointees.
    “Was the previous AAT perfect? Probably not, but it could probably have been reviewed and repaired, for far less upheaval, far less risk and far less cost than what will be achieved by passing these bills in this place. So, for the sake of Australian taxpayers and for the sake of sensible government, we cannot pass these bills tonight. Let's go back to review and repair.”

    National Party • Senator • 15 May 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  6. Slade Brockman Brockman opposes the bill because he says the government has rushed a complex overhaul of the review tribunal through the Senate with too little scrutiny.
    “I've got up in this place many times and talked about the importance of the committee process and the importance of the scrutiny role of the Senate in particular with regard to government legislation. It is something that is vitally important, so to see it now being truncated by Labor in alliance with others is I think very telling as to what the priorities of both this government and those of the crossbench are.”

    Liberal Party • Senator • 15 May 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗

Greens

4 speakers · 3 support · 1 unclear

  1. David Shoebridge Shoebridge says the Greens will support the bill because the inquiry-led amendments fixed major problems with tribunal integrity and social security review rights, and because the reforms are now supportable.
    “It's not perfect. The process is inadequate, but we've got to a point where it's supportable.”

    Australian Greens • Senator • 15 May 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  2. Elizabeth Watson-Brown Watson-Brown raises a long list of concerns about the bill, especially around accessibility, tribunal appointments, review periods and migration procedures, but does not clearly state whether the Greens will support or oppose it.
    “These are a number of concerns we have. We would be very interested to hear the Attorney-General's response.”

    Australian Greens • MP • 21 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  3. Max Chandler-Mather Chandler-Mather says the Greens will support the bill in the House, but they want the tribunal reforms fixed so they do not harm vulnerable Centrelink, refugee and migration applicants or weaken the new body’s integrity.
    “As noted above, this is a generational reform and we need to take the time to ensure it is right. While supporting the bill and not opposing the amendments in this House, the Greens reserve their position in the Senate. To that end we will continue to be guided by the valuable input of stakeholders and two core principles—that this reform must leave no-one behind and must leave no door open for a future government to undermine its integrity.”

    Australian Greens • MP • 20 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  4. Stephen Bates Stephen Bates says the Greens will support the bill in the House, but they want further changes because the draft still risks harming vulnerable Centrelink users and leaves other fairness problems in the migration and refugee parts of the new tribunal.
    “As noted above, this is a generational reform and we need to take the time to get this right. While we will be supporting the bill and not opposing any government amendments in this House, we reserve our position in the Senate. To that end, we will continue to be guided by the valuable input of stakeholders and by two core principles— that this reform must leave no-one behind and must leave no door open for future governments to undermine its integrity.”

    Australian Greens • MP • 21 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗

One Nation

1 speaker · 1 support

  1. Malcolm Roberts Roberts says One Nation will reluctantly support the bill because the tribunal changes are needed, but he is sharply critical of the government's rushed and inadequate scrutiny process and says he may yet change his mind.
    “So the process of coming to where we are with the Administrative Review Tribunal was flawed. Senators Scarr and Shoebridge echoed that. But the changes are needed. As servants to the people of Queensland and Australia, my team and I have weighed the pros and cons. Based on all of this, I somewhat reluctantly decided to support the bill. Having listened, though, to Senators Scarr and Shoebridge, who are lawyers and whom I respect, I will be reflecting and may change my mind. But, at the moment, we are highly critical of the government's process in developing this bill and putting it through what amounts to less-than-perfect, inadequate scrutiny. I do say the changes are needed at the moment. I reluctantly support the bill.”

    Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party • Senator • 15 May 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗

Minor parties and independents

5 speakers · 6 contributions · 5 mixed

  1. Dai Le Le is broadly supportive of the bill as a needed reform of the review system, but says it still falls short for migrant, refugee and visa applicants because of access, fairness and procedural fairness concerns.
    “Although the bill aims to provide more accessible and responsive support for people who require additional and tailored support, there are still some gaps and pain points that I would like to address. In particular, the bill falls short of meeting its objective for migrant and visa applicants. It is especially concerning for me that the objective under the new legislation is more concerned with being efficient and quick rather than being fair, just and economical, like the AAT. There must be a balance in this. I appreciate that the government is attempting to address the overdue system, but I call on the government to consider the barriers to access and the equity issues for migrants, refugees and asylum-seeking applicants. It is these applicants who are most in need of greater flexibility and dedicated measures to improve accessibility.”

    Independent • MP • 20 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  2. Helen Haines Haines says she wants the new tribunal to succeed and supports replacing the AATThe older tribunal this bill replaces, and whose unfinished cases and references are being moved across., but she will not back the bill as written until government amendments fix the appointments process and make it more transparent and merit-based.
    “In the briefing that I had last night with the Attorney-General's Department, I was assured that this glaring problem will be remedied. But here's my dilemma: until these amendments are circulated and moved by the government, at this moment in this debate we have no guarantees that the bill clears this key and critical hurdle. The Attorney-General has offered assurances that proposed amendments will address my concerns, so I will now wait for these amendments to come to the House. I must reserve my position on this bill until I have them here in the House. I cannot give a position on incomplete legislation.”

    Independent • MP • 20 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  3. Zoe Daniel Zoe Daniel says the bill is not ready to pass yet because its legal-assistance provisions for refugees and asylum seekers are still unclear and may deny procedural fairness.
    “In short, there is some work to do on this bill for it to be ready to pass. I acknowledge that the government has a large package of amendments that it is yet to move, and I would add here that better practice would have been to finish the draft bill, including the amendments, before this debate, rather than all of us having a debate on a bill that is not final.”

    Independent • MP • 20 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  4. Kylea Tink Tink will not oppose the bill, but she wants it amended because it keeps a separate and more restrictive process for migrant and refugee applicants.
    “"whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House:”

    Independent • MP • 21 Mar 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗

Full record

Full chat