This bill became law on Jun 11th, 2024.
Climate, energy & environment
Offshore oil and gas health and safety representatives must get initial and yearly refresher training, and operators or employers must give paid time off and cover the reasonable costs.
Gaps in offshore safety oversight left weak training, reporting, inspection and accountability arrangements for offshore facilities and diving operations. The bill requires proper training and paid time off for safety representatives, expands NOPSEMAThe regulator that oversees offshore safety and environmental rules, and here gets more inspection and reporting powers. inspection and reporting powers, and makes titleholders help operators meet safety duties.
Australia already regulated offshore petroleum and greenhouse gas storage through NOPSEMAThe regulator that oversees offshore safety and environmental rules, and here gets more inspection and reporting powers., but the government said the regime still had weak training, reporting, inspection and accountability settings around offshore facilities and diving operations. The bill was introduced in February 2024 to close those gaps by strengthening safety representative training, operator and titleholderThe person or company that holds the legal right to an offshore petroleum or greenhouse gas title, and must make sure the operator can meet safety duties. duties, and NOPSEMAThe regulator that oversees offshore safety and environmental rules, and here gets more inspection and reporting powers. oversight powers, then passed both houses in May and received Royal AssentThe final step that turns a passed bill into an Act of Parliament. in June 2024.
The main criticism was not aimed at the worker-safety measures but at the bill’s original offshore approvals changes, which critics said could weaken environmental checks, reduce First Nations and community consultation, and make new gas projects easier to push through. That case was raised by the Greens and several crossbench independents, many of whom said the bill was being rushed and should not pass in that form unless the disputed approvals provisions were removed or narrowed.
Hon Madeleine King MP introduced this bill. In the House final vote, support came from Labor, Katter's Australian Party, Liberal Party, Nationals, some crossbench members; opposition came from Greens, Centre Alliance, some crossbench members.
Did it become law?
Yes
Became law 11 June 2024
Final passage
Recorded final vote
2 counted final-passage votes were recorded.
Passage speed
117 days
From introduction to the latest recorded parliamentary step
Meaning
Offshore oil and gas health and safety representatives must get initial and yearly refresher training, and operators or employers must give paid time off and cover the reasonable costs.
Offshore workers’ safety representatives can force a review of safety management documents when they reasonably think a new or ongoing risk has not been properly addressed.
Petroleum and greenhouse gas titleholders must take practical steps to make sure a separate facility operatorThe company running the offshore facility day to day and responsible for meeting safety and reporting duties. can meet offshore health and safety duties and actually does so.
NOPSEMAThe regulator that oversees offshore safety and environmental rules, and here gets more inspection and reporting powers. inspectors can board and inspect dive support vessels before and after they count as part of an offshore facility, so diving safety can be checked through the whole operation.
Facility operators must send monthly safety reports to NOPSEMAThe regulator that oversees offshore safety and environmental rules, and here gets more inspection and reporting powers. and floating offshore facilities must tell NOPSEMAThe regulator that oversees offshore safety and environmental rules, and here gets more inspection and reporting powers. when they enter or leave the offshore regulatory regime.
The new clause revises the training requirements to provide that an HSR must complete an initial training course and refresher training courses. The initial training course should be completed as soon as practicable after being selected as an HSR. A refresher training course should be completed as soon as practicable before or after the end of 12 months after the completion of the initial training course or their last refresher training course. The training courses may not be available on a regular basis, so some flexibility needs to be afforded to HSRs in terms of the required timing to complete training.Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Legislation Amendment (Safety and Other Measures) explanatory memorandum
This item inserts a new clause 37A which allows an HSR to request a review of safety management-related documents by the operator of the facility. The HSR may request a review of safety management-related documents if the HSR reasonably believes that a circumstance exists that affects the health and safety of workers at the facility and the operator has not adequately reviewed the documents in response to the circumstance.Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Legislation Amendment (Safety and Other Measures) explanatory memorandum
the registered holder of the title must take all reasonably practicable steps to ensure that the operator complies with, and is able to comply with, its obligations under this Act (and any regulations made for the purposes of this Act), in so far as they relate to the health and safety of persons at or near the facility.Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Legislation Amendment (Safety and Other Measures) as-passed bill text
The new clauses permit NOPSEMA inspectors to monitor compliance with diving‑related obligations on a dive vessel before and after it is an associated offshore place of a facility. This will enable NOPSEMA to monitor compliance in relation to all aspects of a diving operation (including decompression and other activities performed at the end of operations, which usually continue while the vessel is sailing away).Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Legislation Amendment (Safety and Other Measures) explanatory memorandum
The item also inserts clause 83B which provides for the vessel activity notification scheme. The new clause requires operators of offshore floating facilities to notify NOPSEMA when they either enter or exit the offshore regulatory framework. This requirement will only require operators to provide basic information to NOPSEMA so that NOPSEMA is aware of which facilities are in the OPGGS regime at any given time. The clause also adds a regulation-making power to enable the regulations to prescribe information to be included in a notification, and to prescribe vessels in relation to which subclause 83B(1) or (2) does not apply. Vessels can be specified in the regulations by class, in accordance with subsection 13(3) of the Legislation Act 2003.Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Legislation Amendment (Safety and Other Measures) explanatory memorandum
Context
Australia already regulated offshore petroleum and greenhouse gas storage through NOPSEMAThe regulator that oversees offshore safety and environmental rules, and here gets more inspection and reporting powers., but the government said the regime still had weak training, reporting, inspection and accountability settings around offshore facilities and diving operations. The bill was introduced in February 2024 to close those gaps by strengthening safety representative training, operator and titleholderThe person or company that holds the legal right to an offshore petroleum or greenhouse gas title, and must make sure the operator can meet safety duties. duties, and NOPSEMAThe regulator that oversees offshore safety and environmental rules, and here gets more inspection and reporting powers. oversight powers, then passed both houses in May and received Royal AssentThe final step that turns a passed bill into an Act of Parliament. in June 2024.
Government says offshore safety rules still have gaps
The minister said the bill was needed because training, reporting, inspection and accountability arrangements for offshore facilities and diving operations were not strong enough.
Hansard ↗Bill introduced to tighten offshore safety oversight
The government introduced the bill to expand NOPSEMAThe regulator that oversees offshore safety and environmental rules, and here gets more inspection and reporting powers. oversight and require stronger safety duties for representatives, operators and titleholders.
Parliamentary timeline ↗House passes the bill
The House completed its consideration of the bill after agreeing to government amendment packages.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Senate passes the bill with amendments
The Senate agreed to the bill at third reading after dealing with government amendments, sending it back to the House in amended form.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Parliament passes the bill
The House agreed to the Senate amendments so both chambers had passed the same text.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Royal AssentThe final step that turns a passed bill into an Act of Parliament. makes the changes law
Royal AssentThe final step that turns a passed bill into an Act of Parliament. turned the bill into an Act, completing the legislative response to the offshore safety gaps identified by the government.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Legislative route
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
Referred to Committee (29/02/2024): Senate Economics Legislation Committee; Committee report (22/03/2024)
Referred to committee
APH bill page notesThe bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Recorded vote: 12 to 41.
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
The chamber considered the bill in detail and dealt with amendments before the next stage.
Consideration in detail debate
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
Consideration in detail debate
Recorded vote: 54 to 13.
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber. Later message exchanges with the other chamber were still recorded afterwards.
Third reading agreed to
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
Third reading agreed to :
The House dealt with Senate amendments or requests so both chambers could settle the bill in the same form.
Consideration of Senate message
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Finally passed both Houses
The Governor-General gave Royal AssentThe final step that turns a passed bill into an Act of Parliament., turning the bill into an Act.
Key criticism
The main criticism was not aimed at the worker-safety measures but at the bill’s original offshore approvals changes, which critics said could weaken environmental checks, reduce First Nations and community consultation, and make new gas projects easier to push through. That case was raised by the Greens and several crossbench independents, many of whom said the bill was being rushed and should not pass in that form unless the disputed approvals provisions were removed or narrowed.
Criticism centred on the original approvals carve-out, not the bill’s core safety reforms.
Weakened environmental and consultation safeguards
Critics said the bill’s original offshore approvals changes would carve out or weaken normal environmental scrutiny and reduce consultation rights for First Nations people and affected communities, making it easier for offshore gas projects to proceed.
Fast-tracking gas projects and giving ministers too much power
Opponents argued the bill would help the gas industry by fast-tracking new offshore gas developments and handing too much unchecked power to the resources minister, with climate and public-interest risks flowing from weaker approvals oversight.
Rushed lawmaking and poor scrutiny
Several critics said the contentious approvals changes were inserted or advanced too quickly, creating confusion about their legal effect and warranting Senate inquiry or delay until wider environment law reforms were settled.
Further sources
Votes
The chamber-passage votes come first. Expand a vote to see the party breakdown.
Senate agreed to the bill's third reading on the voices, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes for final passage in that chamber.
Passed on the voices
In a voice vote, members call out Aye or No and the presiding officer judges which side has it. Individual names are only recorded if a formal division is called.
Passed 54 to 13. Support came from Labor, Katter's Australian Party, Liberal Party, and Nationals. Opposition came from Greens and Centre Alliance. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Passed 55 to 13. Support came from Labor, Katter's Australian Party, and Nationals. Opposition came from Greens and Centre Alliance. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Earlier bill-stage votes
Passed 58 to 13. Support came from Labor and Liberal Party. Opposition came from Greens, Centre Alliance, and minor parties and independents. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Amendments grouped by chamber. These cards include amendment outcomes recorded without a counted division.
House
Passed 58 to 14. Support came from Labor and Liberal Party. Opposition came from Greens, Centre Alliance, and minor parties and independents. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The motion carried, allowing the House to move straight to the substantive question.
Defeated 14 to 55. Support came from Greens, Centre Alliance, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The House did not add the Greens objection to the second-reading motion.
Passed 57 to 14. Support came from Labor and Liberal Party. Opposition came from Greens, Centre Alliance, and minor parties and independents. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The carried closure motion moved the House straight to a decision on the amendment.
Defeated 10 to 60. Support came from Greens. Opposition came from Labor, Centre Alliance, and Liberal Party. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The amendment was defeated, so the House did not adopt the crossbench objection to the EPBCAustralia's main federal environment law, which critics say the bill's offshore approvals changes could weaken or carve out.-related changes.
Passed 51 to 13. Support came from Labor and Liberal Party. Opposition came from Greens, Centre Alliance, and minor parties and independents. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The motion carried, limiting further debate at that point in detail consideration.
Defeated 14 to 52. 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.
The amendments were defeated, so the offshore regulatory changes remained in the bill.
Passed 60 to 13. Support came from Labor, Liberal Party, Nationals, and Katter's Australian Party. Opposition came from Greens, Centre Alliance, and minor parties and independents. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The motion carried, bringing debate at that point to a close.
Passed 79 to 57. Support came from Labor, Centre Alliance, and Katter's Australian Party. Opposition came from Liberal Party and Nationals. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The amendments were agreed to, so the government tightened the bill's approval pathway before the bill progressed.
Passed 47 to 14. Support came from Labor and Liberal Party. Opposition came from Greens, Centre Alliance, and minor parties and independents. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The motion carried, advancing the chamber through the detail stage more quickly.
Defeated 14 to 55. Support came from Greens, Centre Alliance, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor, Katter's Australian Party, Liberal Party, and Nationals. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The amendment was defeated, so the bill did not gain that extra tabling requirement.
This amendment would add extra conditions before the regulations can be made, including Environment Minister consultation and satisfaction about ecologically sustainable development.
This amendment would add extra conditions before the regulations can be made, including Environment Minister consultation and satisfaction about ecologically sustainable development.
Passed on the voices
The chamber agreed to this amendment without a counted vote — the presiding officer judged the ayes louder than the noes, and no member called for a division.
The APH progress record says 3 Government amendments were agreed without a counted division being collected by this run.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
The House agreed to the amendments made by the Senate, so the bill could pass both chambers in the same form.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Senate
Defeated 26 to 33. Support came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and UAP. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents.
The Senate rejected the proposed second-reading statement, so those political notes and calls were not added to the motion.
Defeated 26 to 33. Support came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and UAP. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents.
This removed the schedule 2The part of the bill that drew most opposition because it dealt with offshore approvals and environmental law changes, not just safety. part 2 material before later votes on related government and opposition amendments.
Passed 33 to 26. Support came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and UAP.
The division rejected the opposition attempt to remove those approval-condition provisions.
Defeated 26 to 33. Support came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and UAP. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents.
The Senate defeated the amendment, leaving the government’s qualified wording in place.
Defeated 26 to 33. Support came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and UAP. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents.
The Senate defeated the package, so the second-reading statement was not amended in that way.
The Senate agreed on voices to the government amendment on sheet SK115, treating certain contractors at a facility as employees for the bill’s employee-protection clauses.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
The Senate agreed on voices to the government amendment on sheet SK114, updating commencement for the remaining schedule 2The part of the bill that drew most opposition because it dealt with offshore approvals and environmental law changes, not just safety. provisions after part 2 was opposed.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
The Senate agreed on voices to the government amendments on sheets SK114 and SK115.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
This list includes amendment votes, procedural votes and votes on the bill itself.
Parliamentary debate
Start here — lead voices
King supports the bill and says it updates offshore petroleum rules to improve worker safety, health and reporting, while also making the regulatory framework more workable.
Read in Hansard ↗Tink opposes the bill because she says its key provisions weaken environmental oversight, reduce First Nations consultation, and interfere with broader EPBCAustralia's main federal environment law, which critics say the bill's offshore approvals changes could weaken or carve out. reform.
Read in Hansard ↗Pearce says the coalition will support the bill and not block it, because it delivers needed offshore safety and regulatory reforms and provides certainty for the gas industry.
Read in Hansard ↗Sophie Scamps says she will oppose the bill because it weakens consultation and environmental safeguards for offshore oil and gas projects.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
2 speakers · 1 support · 1 oppose
“The bill I am introducing to the parliament today achieves this objective.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The Australian Greens have circulated amendments on sheet 2425 revised that are identical to the government amendments that we just dealt with. I will therefore not put the question on those amendments. I will now deal with the amendments circulated by the opposition on sheet 2490. The question is that subsections 790E(1A) to (1D) and subsection 790E(6) in item 6 of schedule 2 stand as printed.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
1 speaker · 1 support
“To conclude, while the federal coalition will not block this bill from progressing through the House, it's imperative that the government takes the decisive action to implement real and urgent changes to support the gas industry and sector as well as the broader resource sector throughout the country. Right now, the layering of industrial relations policies, the safeguard mechanism, the ongoing attacks from legal activists and general anti-business environment will have a long-term impact on investment prospects going into the future.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
3 speakers · 8 contributions · 3 oppose
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Max Chandler-Mather on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Max Chandler-Mather opposes the bill, saying it weakens environmental approvals and First Nations consultation while handing more power to the gas industry and the resources minister. He argues Labor is fast-tracking climate-wrecking gas projects and breaking its promises on environmental reform.
“The amendment proposed to the OPGGS Act threatens to sideline the environment minister and bypass environmental approvals and First Nations consultation required by the EPBC Act for new oil and gas approvals. This amendment trashes our environmental laws and makes a mockery of consultation with the explicit aim of fast-tracking climate-wrecking coal, oil and gas projects.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Chandler-Mather opposes the bill, arguing it will make it easier to approve new gas projects and worsen the climate crisis. He says it will mainly benefit gas corporations and leave the public with more floods, fires and heatwaves.
“Again, we've been told by the International Energy Agency and basically every leading climate scientist in the world that if we want any chance of stopping climate change then there can be no new coal, oil or gas projects. Here we are debating a bill, the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Legislation Amendment (Safety and Other Measures) Bill 2024, that will make it more likely that in the future we will see approvals for massive gas projects like the Santos Barossa gas project—which, by the way, will release 80 per cent of Australia's 2022 emissions, over 400 million tonnes. I don't know how the government can justify this, and it would be interesting, I think, for them to go to members for the public who have been victims of climate change fuelled natural disasters and say their response to that is to open up more coal, oil and gas projects and pass laws, like the one we are debating right now, that will make it easier and faster for massive gas corporations like Santos to get approval for massive climate bombs like the Barossa gas project.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 3 separate contributions by Elizabeth Watson-Brown on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Watson-Brown opposes the bill and moves to strip out the key provision that would weaken environmental approval protections for gas projects. She argues it hands power to the pro-gas resources minister, shuts First Nations people out, and entrenches new gas development at odds with climate action.
“That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: "the House:”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Watson-Brown says the Greens oppose the bill in its current form and will not back it because it is flawed and should go to a Senate inquiry instead of being rushed through. She argues the amendments cannot fix it and the bill should wait until broader environment law reforms are in place.
“I second the motion. This flawed bill, the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Legislation Amendment (Safety and Other Measures) Bill 2024, cannot be fixed by amendments. We need to put it to a Senate inquiry. The Labor government and the Minister for the Environment and Water have absolutely failed to deliver on their promises to overhaul our broken environment laws, to make them stronger and to truly protect our environment.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Watson-Brown opposes the bill and says it gives gas companies and the resources minister too much power to fast-track fossil fuel projects and bypass environmental scrutiny. She argues it should be delayed until the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act reforms are in place.
“This bill must be considered after the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act reforms have come into place.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 3 separate contributions by Adam Bandt, including an amendment-moving contribution. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Bandt opposes the bill and says it is a dirty deal that fast-tracks new gas projects, weakens consultation rights for First Nations people, and worsens the climate crisis. He says Labor should abandon it and stop opening new coal and gas projects.
“It is time to stop opening coal and gas projects, listen to First Nations voices in this country and ditch this bill. (Time expired)”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Moved amendment
Bandt opposes the bill and says it should be deferred until the government finishes its environment law consultations. He argues it fast-tracks gas projects, weakens consultation rights for First Nations people, and gives the resources minister too much unchecked power.
“If you don't even have the guts to speak to this bill, at the very least defer it until you've done your consultations.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Bandt opposes the bill in its current form and argues it should not be rushed through because it would weaken First Nations consultation and environmental protections for offshore gas projects. He wants any government amendments sent to a Senate inquiry first so their effect can be properly tested.
“What we're proposing is that, given the significance of the further amendments that the government want to bring—which they have foreshadowed in the media—they also need to be considered by a Senate inquiry.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
6 speakers · 6 oppose
“The bill should be amended to withdraw part 2 of schedule 2, and I thank the member for Warringah for her amendments that seek to do just this. I'll be supporting those amendments. This section should be deleted, not only because it weakens consultation requirements but also because it will adversely impact First Nations communities, and there are very real questions about whether this bill is compatible with human rights in this regard. It also curtails the EPBC reform that is currently underway and the ongoing review of the OPGGS environmental regulations.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise today to speak against this bill in the strongest possible terms. One of the main reasons the people of Mackellar sent me to this place was that they wanted greater integrity and transparency from our politicians and in our political system. The way the Minister for Resources has tried to sneak through an amendment to the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Legislation Amendment (Safety and Other Measures) Bill 2024, an amendment which would weaken the consultation obligations of offshore oil and gas proponents, is a masterclass in lack of transparency and lack of consultation.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill cannot be supported, and it should not be supported unless proposed section 790E(2) of schedule 2 is deleted.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The parliament should pass immediately reforms to improve worker safety while allowing members of parliament adequate time to consider controversial changes to other parts of the bill on their merits. As an Independent I consider each bill on its individual merits, and I cannot support legislation such as this that has serious flaws for the environment and for the communities. I will not be supporting this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“At the consideration-in-detail stage, I will be moving an amendment, with the support of the member for Goldstein and many here on the crossbench, to try and improve this bill. It is an absolutely shameful day for the Albanese government.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I want to make my position on this very clear. Australia currently stands at a unique political moment where historic reforms to the EPBC Act are now within reach. This has not been the case for many decades, and, if we miss this genuine opportunity, we may not get another for many more. Our environment, our biodiversity and, indeed, our future will be much the worse for it. On this bill, therefore, I stand by my stated position—that the EPBC carve out should be removed. As it stands, I will not vote for this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Record
House · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
House · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading agreed to
Recorded vote: 12 to 41.
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
House · Consideration in detail debate
Consideration in detail
The chamber considered the bill in detail and dealt with amendments before the next stage.
House · Consideration in detail: amendments considered
Amendment packages agreed
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
House · Third reading agreed to
Recorded vote: 54 to 13.
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Senate · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Senate · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Senate · Second reading agreed to
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Senate · Amendments considered
Amendment packages agreed
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
House · Consideration of Senate message
House agreed to Senate amendments
The House dealt with Senate amendments or requests so both chambers could settle the bill in the same form.
Parliament · Finally passed both Houses
Passed both houses
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Assent · Assent
Assent
The Governor-General gave Royal AssentThe final step that turns a passed bill into an Act of Parliament., turning the bill into an Act.
Senate Economics Legislation Committee; Committee report (22/03/2024)
Referred to committee
Referred to Committee (29 Feb 2024): Senate Economics Legislation Committee; Committee report (22 Mar 2024)
APH bill page notes
