This bill became law on Sep 2nd, 2024.
Law, justice & rights
Australia now makes it a federal crime to share sexual images, video or audio of an adult online without that person's consent, whether the material is real or fake.
AISoftware that can generate or alter images, video or audio; on this page it is the technology that can create deepfakes. deepfakes created a gap because fake sexual images, videos and audio could be shared online without consent and were becoming hard to detect. The bill creates a clearer federal offence for sharing sexual material without consent, including deepfakes, and increases penalties for creators and repeat offenders.
Existing CommonwealthThe federal Australian government and its laws, as distinct from state or territory law; the page discusses Commonwealth offences and Commonwealth criminal law. offences already covered some image-based abuse, but the rapid spread of AISoftware that can generate or alter images, video or audio; on this page it is the technology that can create deepfakes.-made and digitally altered sexual material exposed a gap because fake sexual images, video and audio could be shared online without consent and were becoming harder to detect. After the Albanese government committed on 1 May 2024, following National Cabinet action on gender-based violence, to strengthen online-harm laws, Parliament passed this bill to create a clearer federal offence covering deepfakes, and it became law in September 2024.
The main criticism was that the offence was drafted too unclearly, especially around consent, which critics said could confuse courts, expose victims to more cross-examination and create unintended legal gaps. Those concerns were raised mainly by Coalition speakers who still backed the bill’s goal, while some crossbench and Greens criticism said the reform did not go far enough into other deepfakeA fake image, video or audio clip made with AI or other digital tools to look or sound real; here it matters because the offence covers fake sexual material as well as real material. harms.
Mark Dreyfus MP introduced this bill. It passed on the voices.
Did it become law?
Yes
Became law 02 Sept 2024
Final passage
Passed without a counted vote
8 recorded amendment or procedural votes were found, but no counted vote on the bill itself was recorded.
Passage speed
89 days
From introduction to the latest recorded parliamentary step
Meaning
Australia now makes it a federal crime to share sexual images, video or audio of an adult online without that person's consent, whether the material is real or fake.
People who share AISoftware that can generate or alter images, video or audio; on this page it is the technology that can create deepfakes.-made or digitally altered sexual deepfakes without consent are covered, because the law treats edited or fully computer-generated fake depictions as part of the offence.
Sharing this kind of sexual material without consent can lead to up to 6 years in prison.
The maximum penalty rises to 7 years if the person who shared the sexual material also created or altered it, which directly targets people who make deepfakes and then spread them.
The maximum penalty also rises to 7 years for repeat offenders who already had at least 3 civil penalty orders for similar online abuse under the Online Safety ActThe federal online harms law that already let regulators issue civil penalty orders for similar abuse; repeated orders can raise the penalty under this bill..
The amendments will repeal sections 474.17A and 474.17B of the Criminal Code and introduce a new offence for the transmission of sexual material relating to persons who are, or appear to be, over the age of 18, without consent. The Bill will also introduce two aggravated offences to this new offence.Criminal Code Amendment (Deepfake Sexual Material) explanatory memorandum
Note: Paragraph (b) includes images, videos or audio depicting a person that have been edited or entirely created using digital technology (including artificial intelligence), generating a realistic but false depiction of the person. Examples of such material are “deepfakes”.Criminal Code Amendment (Deepfake Sexual Material) as-passed bill text
Penalty: Imprisonment for 6 years.Criminal Code Amendment (Deepfake Sexual Material) as-passed bill text
The second aggravated offence will apply an increased penalty to the offence where the commission of the offence involves the non-consensual sharing of sexual material, and the person was responsible for the creation or alteration of the material transmitted.Criminal Code Amendment (Deepfake Sexual Material) explanatory memorandum
The first aggravated offence will apply an increased penalty to the offence where the commission of the offence involves the non-consensual sharing of sexual material, and, before the commission of that offence, three or more civil penalty orders were made against the person for contraventions of relevant provisions of the Online Safety Act.Criminal Code Amendment (Deepfake Sexual Material) explanatory memorandum
Context
Existing CommonwealthThe federal Australian government and its laws, as distinct from state or territory law; the page discusses Commonwealth offences and Commonwealth criminal law. offences already covered some image-based abuse, but the rapid spread of AISoftware that can generate or alter images, video or audio; on this page it is the technology that can create deepfakes.-made and digitally altered sexual material exposed a gap because fake sexual images, video and audio could be shared online without consent and were becoming harder to detect. After the Albanese government committed on 1 May 2024, following National Cabinet action on gender-based violence, to strengthen online-harm laws, Parliament passed this bill to create a clearer federal offence covering deepfakes, and it became law in September 2024.
Government commits to ban non-consensual deepfakeA fake image, video or audio clip made with AI or other digital tools to look or sound real; here it matters because the offence covers fake sexual material as well as real material. sexual material
During the push for stronger action on gender-based violence, the Albanese government publicly committed to introduce new measures targeting online harms to women and girls, including deepfakeA fake image, video or audio clip made with AI or other digital tools to look or sound real; here it matters because the offence covers fake sexual material as well as real material. pornography.
Hansard ↗Bill introduced to close the deepfakeA fake image, video or audio clip made with AI or other digital tools to look or sound real; here it matters because the offence covers fake sexual material as well as real material. abuse gap
The Attorney-GeneralThe federal minister in charge of justice and criminal law policy, who introduced the bill to Parliament. introduced the bill, saying it would strengthen existing CommonwealthThe federal Australian government and its laws, as distinct from state or territory law; the page discusses Commonwealth offences and Commonwealth criminal law. offences and create new offences for the online harm caused by deepfakes and other artificially generated sexual material.
Hansard ↗Parliament passes the bill
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, clearing the way for new federal offences covering the non-consensual sharing of real and fake sexual material.
Parliamentary timeline ↗DeepfakeA fake image, video or audio clip made with AI or other digital tools to look or sound real; here it matters because the offence covers fake sexual material as well as real material. sexual material offences become law
Royal AssentThe final step that turns a passed bill into law; the page says this happened in September 2024. turned the bill into an Act, locking in criminal penalties including higher maximum sentences for people who create or alter the material they then share.
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 readingA parliamentary stage where members debate the purpose of a bill and can move a statement of support or criticism before detailed consideration., opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second readingA parliamentary stage where members debate the purpose of a bill and can move a statement of support or criticism before detailed consideration. moved
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Referred to Federation Chamber
Referred to Committee (27/06/2024): Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (08/08/2024)
Referred to committee
APH bill page notesThe bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The chamber agreed to the bill at second readingA parliamentary stage where members debate the purpose of a bill and can move a statement of support or criticism before detailed consideration., meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second readingA parliamentary stage where members debate the purpose of a bill and can move a statement of support or criticism before detailed consideration. agreed to
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Third reading agreed to
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second readingA parliamentary stage where members debate the purpose of a bill and can move a statement of support or criticism before detailed consideration., opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second readingA parliamentary stage where members debate the purpose of a bill and can move a statement of support or criticism before detailed consideration. moved
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The chamber agreed to the bill at second readingA parliamentary stage where members debate the purpose of a bill and can move a statement of support or criticism before detailed consideration., meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second readingA parliamentary stage where members debate the purpose of a bill and can move a statement of support or criticism before detailed consideration. agreed to
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Third reading agreed to
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Finally passed both Houses
The Governor-General gave Royal AssentThe final step that turns a passed bill into law; the page says this happened in September 2024., turning the bill into an Act.
Key criticism
The main criticism was that the offence was drafted too unclearly, especially around consent, which critics said could confuse courts, expose victims to more cross-examination and create unintended legal gaps. Those concerns were raised mainly by Coalition speakers who still backed the bill’s goal, while some crossbench and Greens criticism said the reform did not go far enough into other deepfakeA fake image, video or audio clip made with AI or other digital tools to look or sound real; here it matters because the offence covers fake sexual material as well as real material. harms.
No party represented in the debate opposed the policy goal; criticism was mostly conditional and focused on drafting or coverage gaps.
Unclear consent test and drafting
Critics said the bill removed clearer consent wording and replaced it with drafting that could make prosecutions harder, create uncertainty for courts and force victims into more contested questioning about whether they consented.
Questionable need to replace existing offence
Some argued the government had not properly explained why the existing law had to be replaced, warning that rewriting the offence could introduce new loopholes or unintended consequences instead of simply clarifying deepfakes within the current framework.
Reform did not cover broader deepfake harms
Crossbench and Greens critics said the bill was too narrow because it did not also address other urgent harms such as political deepfakes before elections, threats to create deepfakeA fake image, video or audio clip made with AI or other digital tools to look or sound real; here it matters because the offence covers fake sexual material as well as real material. sexual material, or wider AISoftware that can generate or alter images, video or audio; on this page it is the technology that can create deepfakes. abuse.
Further sources
Votes
The bill passed both chambers on the voices. The counted divisions below were about amendments or procedure, not final passage.
House agreed to the bill's third reading on the voices, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes for final passage in that chamber.
Passed on the voices
In a voice vote, members call out Aye or No and the presiding officer judges which side has it. Individual names are only recorded if a formal division is called.
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.
Recorded amendment and procedural votes grouped by chamber. Expand a vote to see the party breakdown.
Senate
Defeated 12 to 23. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, and minor parties and independents.
This was a broader call for the law to go further than the bill itself by targeting creation and threats as well as sharing. Its defeat left the bill focused on non-consensual sharing and aggravated offending.
Defeated 12 to 24. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, and minor parties and independents.
This was a second-reading statement on election integrity, not a direct change to the bill text. Its defeat left the deepfakeA fake image, video or audio clip made with AI or other digital tools to look or sound real; here it matters because the offence covers fake sexual material as well as real material. bill limited to sexually explicit material.
Defeated 12 to 24. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, and minor parties and independents.
This was a second-reading statement pressing for election-specific deepfakeA fake image, video or audio clip made with AI or other digital tools to look or sound real; here it matters because the offence covers fake sexual material as well as real material. rules rather than altering the bill's offences. Its defeat left no new political-deepfakeA fake image, video or audio clip made with AI or other digital tools to look or sound real; here it matters because the offence covers fake sexual material as well as real material. protections in the bill.
Defeated 30 to 31. Support came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor and Greens. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
This was a technical bill-text amendment aimed at removing any doubt that digitally altered material was covered. Defeat kept the bill's original wording intact.
Defeated 30 to 31. Support came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor and Greens. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
This would have added a formal post-implementation review. Its defeat meant the bill passed without a mandatory review clause.
Defeated 12 to 24. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor, Nationals, and minor parties and independents.
This was a carve-out designed to narrow criminal liability for younger children. Its defeat left the offence without that age-based exclusion.
Moved by David Pocock (Independent). Defeated 12 to 24. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, and minor parties and independents.
This was a second-reading statement about election integrity, not a direct change to the bill text. Its defeat left the bill focused on sexual-material offences only.
Moved by David Shoebridge (Greens). Defeated 12 to 24. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, and minor parties and independents.
This was a statement of political position on election deepfakes rather than a direct amendment to the bill. Its defeat meant the bill proceeded without those proposed protections.
These are amendment votes, not the final passage vote on the bill itself. The bill passed both chambers on the voices.
Parliamentary debate
Start here — lead voices
Dreyfus supports the bill and says it will strengthen CommonwealthThe federal Australian government and its laws, as distinct from state or territory law; the page discusses Commonwealth offences and Commonwealth criminal law. offences to respond to deepfakeA fake image, video or audio clip made with AI or other digital tools to look or sound real; here it matters because the offence covers fake sexual material as well as real material. and other non-consensual sexual material.
Read in Hansard ↗Kerrynne Liddle opposes the bill as drafted, saying it is well intentioned but flawed and too weak to protect victims properly.
Read in Hansard ↗Fletcher says the coalition will not oppose the bill and supports its aim of making the distribution of deepfakeA fake image, video or audio clip made with AI or other digital tools to look or sound real; here it matters because the offence covers fake sexual material as well as real material. sexual material a crime.
Read in Hansard ↗Pocock supports the bill as a step in the right direction and welcomes its new offences for non-consensual deepfakeA fake image, video or audio clip made with AI or other digital tools to look or sound real; here it matters because the offence covers fake sexual material as well as real material. sexual material, but says it does not go far enough because broader deepfakeA fake image, video or audio clip made with AI or other digital tools to look or sound real; here it matters because the offence covers fake sexual material as well as real material. harms, especially in elections, still need urgent regulation.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
14 speakers · 15 contributions · 14 support
“This bill addresses the gap, ensuring that those who exploit technology to create and disseminate harmful material are held accountable. The introduction of these new offences is a clear signal that the law must evolve to meet the challenges posed by new technology. Moreover, this legislation is a response to the growing public outcry against the misuse of deepfake technologies.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Legislative change plays an important role in sending a strong message that non-consensual distribution of such horrible images is unacceptable to us as leaders—as political leaders, as community leaders and as citizens and that applies whether it is AI-generated—artificial intelligence—or it is real. This bill starts the first steps towards regulating the worst effects of this technology. Because we cannot wait until something else happens to regulate technologically created harms, until it becomes worse, until the scourge is so widespread that we have lost control of it completely. We cannot wait for things to get worse before we change these laws. That is why I call on the opposition to support this bill, to support the necessary changes that we are making to address these issues, and to begin that journey together. I commend this bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This is a crucial piece of legislation that is going to change and protect lives.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise to support the Criminal Code Amendment (Deepfake Sexual Material) Bill 2024. Every time you read or hear the news there is another story about artificial intelligence, deepfake abuse, and the ongoing debate on how to regulate these rapidly advancing technologies. Encountering many forms of sexual violence online driven by AI-generated deepfake technology is deeply unsettling. Women represent 99 per cent of those targeted by deepfake pornography, which makes up 98 per cent of all deepfake videos online.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I congratulate the Attorney-General for this very important legislation. It is one of the ways we are seeking to address the increasingly hostile and dangerous online world that exists for our children. I think the increasingly hostile and dangerous online world, instead of helping us build a better, more equal, fairer society, in many respects is taking us backwards.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I also rise in support of the Criminal Code Amendment (Deepfake Sexual Material) Bill 2024. This important bill will ban the non-consensual sharing of deepfake sexually explicit material, something which is a serious and growing concern which is already, very sadly, impacting Australians who have fallen victim to this new technological abuse. Digitally created and altered sexually explicit material is a vile and damaging form of abuse that can inflict deep harm on victims.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This new criminal law will ban non-consensual sharing of deepfake pornography. It's necessary as a consequence of the time we live in and the acceleration of technology, particularly artificial intelligence technologies.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I support this bill because it penalises the sharing of non-consensual deepfake sexual material. It will reduce this terrible kind of abuse, and I support this bill because it helps our continuing fight against gendered violence in our country. I commend this bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“In conclusion, the passage of this bill is not merely a legal obligation; it is a moral imperative. It sends a clear message that Australia stands firm against digital exploitation and affirms our commitment to protecting the dignity and rights of every Australian. I urge all members of this House to support this vital reform and to stand together in defence of justice, privacy and human dignity.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“In conclusion, this bill will assist to protect the community from the growing trend of emerging online harms and will send a clear message to perpetrators that serious penalties apply to those who create and distribute real or fake sexual material without consent. This is another sign that the Albanese government is committed to keeping Australians safe from technology facilitated abuse.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Mark Dreyfus on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Minister's second reading speech
Dreyfus supports the bill and says it will strengthen CommonwealthThe federal Australian government and its laws, as distinct from state or territory law; the page discusses Commonwealth offences and Commonwealth criminal law. offences to respond to deepfakeA fake image, video or audio clip made with AI or other digital tools to look or sound real; here it matters because the offence covers fake sexual material as well as real material. and other non-consensual sexual material. He argues it is needed to protect victims, keep the law up to date, and hold perpetrators to account.
“The bill will hold perpetrators to account for causing harm through the non-consensual sharing of deepfakes, and ensure Australia's criminal offences keep pace with new technology.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Mark Dreyfus supports the bill, saying it will strengthen the criminal law against non-consensual sharing of deepfakeA fake image, video or audio clip made with AI or other digital tools to look or sound real; here it matters because the offence covers fake sexual material as well as real material. sexual material and better protect victims from online abuse. He argues the existing offences do not adequately cover deepfakes and says the opposition should back the stronger laws.
“The opposition should instead support stronger laws to counter deepfake sexually explicit material.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“It's vitally important to have this legislation in place. As I say, these measures add to the already record amounts of funding that we have put in place, since we came into government, to end violence against women and children in one generation. We have our national plan. We have a major investment in providing frontline services. We have announced in the budget our 'leaving violence' payment, which is now permanent. We are working with all of the states and territories—and we call on all the community, as well, to work with us—with the aim of ending violence against women and children. I know I've spoken on this in the House many times, and I know it's an objective that we all share. That's why taking the action in this bill is vitally important. With the growth of AI and the horrendous depictions that we see, it's important that we pass this bill and that we keep speaking publicly about this and about the action that needs to be taken. I commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The Bill will hold perpetrators to account for causing harm through the non-consensual sharing of deepfakes, and ensure Australia's criminal offences keep pace with new technology.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The Criminal Code Amendment (Deepfake Sexual Material) Bill 2024 is a fundamentally important bill tackling the exploitation and the targeting of mostly women within our society. The bill strengthens existing Commonwealth criminal offences and creates new offences to respond to the online harm caused by deepfake pornographic material and other artificially generated, sexually explicit material.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
5 speakers · 4 support · 1 oppose
“As I have said, the coalition supports the intention of this bill. We will not oppose the bill in this place. That's unsurprising. The underlying issue that this bill addresses is the same issue that we addressed with our 2018 legislation. The coalition agrees that the use of carriage services to distribute deepfake sexual material is a crime. That is why we made it a crime in our 2018 legislation. But we will ask that this bill be closely scrutinised, because we all have an interest in ensuring that whatever laws we end up with are fit for purpose. I thank the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“As we've said consistently, we support the intent of this legislation. We will work constructively to ensure that deepfakes can be addressed, as we have been doing since 2018. We support and will not stand in the way of the legislation, but, as I've outlined, we have some serious concerns and we will move amendments which we think will improve the bill, given the very legitimate concerns that I have raised, particularly in relation to the cross-examination of victims and potentially dragging them through the courts.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We've seen a lot of work in this space previously, but I am concerned about the current bill and the removal of the current definition of 'consent'. Currently, the law says explicitly that consent means 'free and voluntary agreement'. But government has actually removed that definition. There are just a few issues with that—given the real focus on the need to keep people safe and what will happen in the AI generated world. How will the courts adjudicate the consent rule if it's not clearly defined in the legislation? That's what we're going to need, and that's what those who seek to use these laws will need: very clear definitions. The courts will need those as well.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Having said that, this is absolutely a very important piece of legislation. This Senate must act to protect, in particular, women and children in our community who are the subject of this vile phenomena.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The bill is flawed. It is well intentioned but ill-informed. The Albanese government should not be allowed to keep the bill as it presents to the chamber but instead make the necessary changes to improve the legislation, to increase safety for all Australians.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
2 speakers · 2 support
“The Greens welcome this bill, which responds to the online harm caused by deepfakes and other artificially generated sexual material. However, it does nothing to stop the creation of those images in the first place.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The Greens have been on record as saying that they support this change and support this incremental change to the existing offence of using a carriage service to transmit sexual material without consent. We support that, but we really could have legislated for this in an afternoon with the broad support of all parties and a very rapid committee process, because the change is, to be quite frank, extremely marginal in terms of the impact it's going to have.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
2 speakers · 2 support
“I rise to speak in support of the Criminal Code Amendment (Deepfake Sexual Material) Bill 2024, which represents a step in the right direction in regulating the use of generative AI in Australia.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This legislation, which I will support, is part of that process.”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 readingA parliamentary stage where members debate the purpose of a bill and can move a statement of support or criticism before detailed consideration. opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second readingA parliamentary stage where members debate the purpose of a bill and can move a statement of support or criticism before detailed consideration., opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
House · Second reading debate
Second readingA parliamentary stage where members debate the purpose of a bill and can move a statement of support or criticism before detailed consideration. debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Referred to Federation Chamber
Referred to Federation Chamber
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Returned to House for further debate
Returned to House for further debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading debate
Second readingA parliamentary stage where members debate the purpose of a bill and can move a statement of support or criticism before detailed consideration. debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading debate
Second readingA parliamentary stage where members debate the purpose of a bill and can move a statement of support or criticism before detailed consideration. debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading agreed to
Second readingA parliamentary stage where members debate the purpose of a bill and can move a statement of support or criticism before detailed consideration. agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second readingA parliamentary stage where members debate the purpose of a bill and can move a statement of support or criticism before detailed consideration., meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
House · Third reading agreed to
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Senate · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Senate · Second reading moved
Second readingA parliamentary stage where members debate the purpose of a bill and can move a statement of support or criticism before detailed consideration. opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second readingA parliamentary stage where members debate the purpose of a bill and can move a statement of support or criticism before detailed consideration., opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second readingA parliamentary stage where members debate the purpose of a bill and can move a statement of support or criticism before detailed consideration. debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second readingA parliamentary stage where members debate the purpose of a bill and can move a statement of support or criticism before detailed consideration. debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Second reading agreed to
Second readingA parliamentary stage where members debate the purpose of a bill and can move a statement of support or criticism before detailed consideration. agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second readingA parliamentary stage where members debate the purpose of a bill and can move a statement of support or criticism before detailed consideration., meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Senate · Committee of the Whole debate
Committee of the Whole debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Third reading agreed to
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Parliament · Finally passed both Houses
Passed both houses
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Assent · Assent
Assent
The Governor-General gave Royal AssentThe final step that turns a passed bill into law; the page says this happened in September 2024., turning the bill into an Act.
Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (08/08/2024)
Referred to committee
Referred to Committee (27 June 2024): Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (8 Aug 2024)
APH bill page notes
