This bill became law on Sep 17th, 2024.
Work & employment
Australia now has an Independent Parliamentary Standards CommissionThe new body that investigates misconduct complaints in federal parliamentary workplaces and can make findings and recommendations under a separate enforcement process. to investigate misconduct complaints in federal parliamentary workplaces under a separate enforcement process.
The Set the Standard reportThe Australian Human Rights Commission review that found major failures in parliamentary workplace culture and recommended an independent enforcement body. exposed ineffective reporting, weak accountability, and behaviour rules in parliamentary workplaces that were incomplete, not independent, and lacked enforcement. This bill creates an independent commission to investigate misconduct, enforce behaviour codesThe conduct rules for parliamentarians, staff and other workers in parliamentary workplaces that set the standards the commission helps enforce., and recommend penalties to make workplaces safer and more respectful.
Federal parliamentary workplaces had long lacked a clear code of conduct, independent complaints handling and enforceable consequences, and the Australian Human Rights CommissionThe national body that produced the Set the Standard report used to justify the reform.’s November 2021 Set the Standard reportThe Australian Human Rights Commission review that found major failures in parliamentary workplace culture and recommended an independent enforcement body. laid out those failures after widespread reports of bullying, sexual harassment and sexual assault. After both houses endorsed interim behaviour codesThe conduct rules for parliamentarians, staff and other workers in parliamentary workplaces that set the standards the commission helps enforce. in February 2023, this bill was introduced in August 2024 to create an independent commission to investigate misconduct and enforce standards, and its passage in September 2024 turned that enforcement system into law.
The main criticism was that the bill stops short of fully independent enforcement because the most serious misconduct findings against MPs still go to parliamentary privileges committees, where sanctions can be softened or handled less transparently. That concern was raised mainly by crossbench and Greens supporters seeking amendments, while no party represented in the debate opposed the bill outright.
Hon Patrick Gorman MP introduced this bill. It passed on the voices.
Did it become law?
Yes
Became law 17 Sept 2024
Final passage
Passed without a counted vote
6 recorded amendment or procedural votes were found, but no counted vote on the bill itself was recorded.
Passage speed
27 days
From introduction to the latest recorded parliamentary step
Meaning
Australia now has an Independent Parliamentary Standards CommissionThe new body that investigates misconduct complaints in federal parliamentary workplaces and can make findings and recommendations under a separate enforcement process. to investigate misconduct complaints in federal parliamentary workplaces under a separate enforcement process.
Serious misconduct findings against a current parliamentarian can be sent to that parliamentarian’s House Privileges CommitteeA committee of the House that can consider penalties when the commission makes a serious finding against a sitting parliamentarian., which then considers what parliamentary penalty to recommend.
Parliamentarians and office-holders must carry out employment penalties recommended by an IPSCThe new body that investigates misconduct complaints in federal parliamentary workplaces and can make findings and recommendations under a separate enforcement process. Commissioner for their staff, including training, salary fines, reassignment or termination.
A new Parliamentary Joint Committee on Parliamentary StandardsThe cross-parliament committee that oversees the commission, including commissioner appointments and reviews of the behaviour codes. oversees the Independent Parliamentary Standards CommissionThe new body that investigates misconduct complaints in federal parliamentary workplaces and can make findings and recommendations under a separate enforcement process. by vetting commissioner appointments, reviewing behaviour codesThe conduct rules for parliamentarians, staff and other workers in parliamentary workplaces that set the standards the commission helps enforce. and watching commissioner performance.
People cannot use freedom of information lawsThe access laws people normally use to seek government documents, which this bill limits for commission material to protect sensitive cases. to get Independent Parliamentary Standards CommissionThe new body that investigates misconduct complaints in federal parliamentary workplaces and can make findings and recommendations under a separate enforcement process. documents, which is meant to protect sensitive complaint and investigation material.
This Part establishes the Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission.Parliamentary Workplace Support Service Amendment (Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission) as-passed bill text
If the decision panel decides to refer a serious breach finding in relation to a current parliamentarian respondent to the relevant Privileges Committee (and the time for applying for a review has expired, a review application has been dismissed, or a review panel has upheld the decision panel’s decision), the relevant panel would be required, as soon as practicable, to refer the finding (with an accompanying statement) to that Committee. This would be referred on a confidential basis. The Privileges Committee would be required to decide, within 60 days or a longer period as required, whether to recommend to the relevant House of the Parliament that it impose a sanction. This could be any relevant sanction it considers appropriate. The Privileges Committee’s report would become public when it is tabled in the Parliament.Parliamentary Workplace Support Service Amendment (Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission) explanatory memorandum
Parliamentarians and office‑holders are also required to take certain employment actions in relation to their employees, including termination of employment, on the recommendation of a Commissioner of the IPSC.Parliamentary Workplace Support Service Amendment (Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission) as-passed bill text
New Part 6A of the Bill would establish the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Parliamentary Standards (PJCPS) to provide oversight of the IPSC. The PJCPS would have functions of considering proposed recommendations for the appointment of Commissioners, reviewing each Behaviour Code, monitoring and reviewing the performance by the Commissioners of their functions, and reporting to the Houses of the Parliament on any matter connected with the performance of the functions of the IPSC or the Commissioners.Parliamentary Workplace Support Service Amendment (Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission) explanatory memorandum
This item would have the effect of excluding the IPSC from the definition of an agency in section 4 of the FOI Act which, in turn, would mean that there would not be a legally enforceable right to obtain access to documents of the IPSC under paragraph 11(1)(a) of the FOI Act. In summary, the effect of this item would be that the IPSC would be excluded from the operation of the FOI Act.Parliamentary Workplace Support Service Amendment (Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission) explanatory memorandum
Context
Federal parliamentary workplaces had long lacked a clear code of conduct, independent complaints handling and enforceable consequences, and the Australian Human Rights CommissionThe national body that produced the Set the Standard report used to justify the reform.’s November 2021 Set the Standard reportThe Australian Human Rights Commission review that found major failures in parliamentary workplace culture and recommended an independent enforcement body. laid out those failures after widespread reports of bullying, sexual harassment and sexual assault. After both houses endorsed interim behaviour codesThe conduct rules for parliamentarians, staff and other workers in parliamentary workplaces that set the standards the commission helps enforce. in February 2023, this bill was introduced in August 2024 to create an independent commission to investigate misconduct and enforce standards, and its passage in September 2024 turned that enforcement system into law.
Set the Standard reportThe Australian Human Rights Commission review that found major failures in parliamentary workplace culture and recommended an independent enforcement body. finds major failures in parliamentary workplaces
The Australian Human Rights CommissionThe national body that produced the Set the Standard report used to justify the reform.'s Set the Standard reportThe Australian Human Rights Commission review that found major failures in parliamentary workplace culture and recommended an independent enforcement body. recommended an independent body to handle misconduct because existing reporting, accountability and behaviour rules were inadequate.
Hansard ↗Parliament adopts interim behaviour codesThe conduct rules for parliamentarians, staff and other workers in parliamentary workplaces that set the standards the commission helps enforce.
Both the House of Representatives and the Senate endorsed parliamentary behaviour codesThe conduct rules for parliamentarians, staff and other workers in parliamentary workplaces that set the standards the commission helps enforce. on an interim basis, but without the independent enforcement body recommended by Set the Standard.
Hansard ↗Government introduces the bill to create the standards commission
The government introduced the bill and said it would establish the Independent Parliamentary Standards CommissionThe new body that investigates misconduct complaints in federal parliamentary workplaces and can make findings and recommendations under a separate enforcement process. recommended in the Set the Standard reportThe Australian Human Rights Commission review that found major failures in parliamentary workplace culture and recommended an independent enforcement body..
Hansard ↗Parliament passes the bill
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, clearing the way for a separate misconduct enforcement process in federal parliamentary workplaces.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Royal AssentThe final step that turns the bill into an Act and makes the new system law. establishes the new system in law
Royal AssentThe final step that turns the bill into an Act and makes the new system law. turned the bill into an Act, formally creating the legal basis for the Independent Parliamentary Standards CommissionThe new body that investigates misconduct complaints in federal parliamentary workplaces and can make findings and recommendations under a separate enforcement process. and its oversight arrangements.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Legislative route
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Referred to Federation Chamber
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
Consideration in detail debate
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Third reading agreed to
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
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 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 the bill into an Act and makes the new system law., turning the bill into an Act.
Key criticism
The main criticism was that the bill stops short of fully independent enforcement because the most serious misconduct findings against MPs still go to parliamentary privileges committees, where sanctions can be softened or handled less transparently. That concern was raised mainly by crossbench and Greens supporters seeking amendments, while no party represented in the debate opposed the bill outright.
Criticism focused on safeguards and design limits, not on rejecting the reform overall.
Serious sanctions still depend on politicians
Critics argued the new commission is not fully independent because the most serious misconduct cases against sitting parliamentarians still go to House privileges committees for penalty recommendations, creating a risk that politicians will remain the final judge of politicians in the hardest cases.
Too little transparency if sanctions are changed or not followed
Some supporters said the bill needed stronger transparency so the public could see serious findings and know when a privileges committee watered down or departed from a recommended sanction. The concern was that important outcomes could be hidden or insufficiently explained.
The commission's reach is still too narrow
Several crossbench MPs argued the reform does not go far enough because some conduct, including behaviour in the chamber, remains outside the commission's remit, leaving gaps in the standards system the bill is meant to strengthen.
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.
Amendments grouped by chamber. Where APH reports aggregate counts, the package card summarizes the matching public amendment sheets by source theme.
House
Defeated 13 to 55. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor and Liberal Party. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The House rejected the proposed second-reading statement, so the bill proceeded without those added calls for stronger sanctions and transparency.
Defeated 13 to 52. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor and Liberal Party. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The House rejected the second-reading statement, then agreed to the original second-reading motion and read the bill a second time.
Defeated 13 to 48. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor and Liberal Party. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The House rejected the proposal, leaving the bill’s commissioner appointment process unchanged.
Defeated 13 to 50. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor and Nationals. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The House rejected the proposal, and the bill was agreed to as amended without that extra appointment safeguard.
The House of Representatives recorded this proposed amendment as carried on voices without a counted division.
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 of Representatives recorded this proposed amendment as carried on voices without a counted division.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Government amendments would this would make the bill refer to the relevant Privileges Committee instead of generic committee membership and remove an unnecessary definition and this would require a Deputy Chair for the parliamentary joint committee and make that office held by an Opposition member elected by the committee.
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.
Senate
Defeated 14 to 20. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, and Nationals. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The Senate rejected the package, so the bill did not gain those extra sanction-suggestion and explanation requirements.
Defeated 14 to 20. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, and Nationals. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The Senate Journal records the package as defeated, so the bill kept the government’s narrower reporting model.
Senator Pocock’s proposal, decided on voices, would have deleted the rule that the deputy chair of the parliamentary joint committee must be a member of the Opposition.
Defeated on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Senator Thorpe’s proposal, decided on voices, would have required the CEO to refer a conduct issue to the IPSCThe new body that investigates misconduct complaints in federal parliamentary workplaces and can make findings and recommendations under a separate enforcement process. if the complainant consented, and otherwise the PWSSThe existing support body that gives advice, confidential help and complaint resolution services, and now sits alongside the new commission. review would continue.
Defeated on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Senator Van’s proposal, decided on voices, would have added a note saying the balance of probabilitiesThe proof test used in the bill for some findings, meaning the decision-maker must think something is more likely than not. means it is more probable than not, while still weighing gravity and inherent improbability.
Defeated on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Senator Pocock’s proposal, decided on voices, would have deleted the rule that the deputy chair of the parliamentary joint committee must be a member of the Opposition.
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.
Parliamentary debate
Start here — lead voices
Patrick Gorman supports the bill, saying it will establish the Independent Parliamentary Standards CommissionThe new body that investigates misconduct complaints in federal parliamentary workplaces and can make findings and recommendations under a separate enforcement process. to enforce the new behaviour codesThe conduct rules for parliamentarians, staff and other workers in parliamentary workplaces that set the standards the commission helps enforce. and improve safety and wellbeing in parliamentary workplaces.
Read in Hansard ↗Waters says the Greens will support the bill because a parliamentary standards commission is long overdue and needed to improve workplace conduct, but she argues it is too weak on sanctions, independence and transparency.
Read in Hansard ↗Tink supports the bill and says it is an important reform to make Parliament a safer, more inclusive workplace, but she argues it is too weak because it does not go far enough on independence, transparency, and the scope of the new standards.
Read in Hansard ↗Gallagher समर्थनs the bill and says it is a necessary long-term reform to create the Independent Parliamentary Standards CommissionThe new body that investigates misconduct complaints in federal parliamentary workplaces and can make findings and recommendations under a separate enforcement process. and enforce the new behaviour codesThe conduct rules for parliamentarians, staff and other workers in parliamentary workplaces that set the standards the commission helps enforce..
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
6 speakers · 8 contributions · 6 support
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Katy Gallagher on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Gallagher समर्थनs the bill and says it is a necessary long-term reform to create the Independent Parliamentary Standards CommissionThe new body that investigates misconduct complaints in federal parliamentary workplaces and can make findings and recommendations under a separate enforcement process. and enforce the new behaviour codesThe conduct rules for parliamentarians, staff and other workers in parliamentary workplaces that set the standards the commission helps enforce.. She argues the parliament has taken time to get it right, and that the package will improve accountability and workplace safety.
“I strongly believe that that gives the IPSC the strongest chance of being successful, and it is up to us to make sure that that is the case and that it doesn't become something that is used to weaponise or play politics with but is a genuine feature of a workplace that is serious about making sure that, if complaints are made, they are dealt with fairly and with appropriate protections for all involved.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Gallagher supports the bill and says it will establish the Independent Parliamentary Standards CommissionThe new body that investigates misconduct complaints in federal parliamentary workplaces and can make findings and recommendations under a separate enforcement process. to enforce behaviour codesThe conduct rules for parliamentarians, staff and other workers in parliamentary workplaces that set the standards the commission helps enforce., improve accountability, and make Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces safer and more respectful. She presents it as a further reform building on the PWSSThe existing support body that gives advice, confidential help and complaint resolution services, and now sits alongside the new commission. and the Set the Standard recommendations.
“This Bill provides further accountability, and will enable enforcement of behaviours codes and standards to improve safety and wellbeing across Commonwealth Parliamentary Workplaces, which is a goal we all share.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“I also just want to acknowledge the work of Senator Katy Gallagher. We need to set the standard. I urge all members to support this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Passage of this legislation will help finalise the implementation of the recommendations from the Set the standard report, helping to ensure that this workplace leads by example and is safer for all—for parliamentarians, for staff and for all of those in the building.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“That's why I'm pleased to support the Parliamentary Workplace Support Service Amendment (Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission) Bill. This bill directly addresses recommendation 22 of the Set the standard: report on the Independent Review into Commonwealth Parliamentary Workplaces from November 2021, probably more commonly known as the Jenkins report.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Patrick Gorman on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Minister's second reading speech
Patrick Gorman supports the bill, saying it will establish the Independent Parliamentary Standards CommissionThe new body that investigates misconduct complaints in federal parliamentary workplaces and can make findings and recommendations under a separate enforcement process. to enforce the new behaviour codesThe conduct rules for parliamentarians, staff and other workers in parliamentary workplaces that set the standards the commission helps enforce. and improve safety and wellbeing in parliamentary workplaces. He argues it delivers further accountability and should help make Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces safer and more respectful.
“This bill provides further accountability. This bill will enable enforcement of behaviours codes and standards to improve safety and wellbeing across Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces, which is a goal we all share.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Gorman supports the bill and commends it to the parliament, saying it will establish the Independent Parliamentary Standards CommissionThe new body that investigates misconduct complaints in federal parliamentary workplaces and can make findings and recommendations under a separate enforcement process. and complete the reforms needed for safe, respectful parliamentary workplaces. He notes there are foreshadowed amendments, but treats those as part of the normal process rather than a reason to oppose the bill.
“In saying all of that, I really do commend this bill to the parliament. It is a credit to all of us that we have got to this point. I am aware there are some foreshadowed amendments, and we will deal with those in the normal way. I want to thank all members for their constructive engagement, including members of the opposition.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“I'm very pleased to commend this bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
3 speakers · 3 support
“I believe that this bill manages to get the balance right. We will no longer decide whether our conduct in our workplaces was a breach of community expectations. That will now be done by an independent commission. That is a very big change for this place. But we will determine what happens when those breaches of the standards occur, and the electorate will expect that we deal with those breaches appropriately.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We support the improvements that this bill will implement in our workplaces and look forward to the continued discussions with the government as this bill moves to the other place.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This has been a long and drawn-out process, but I'm comfortable that we have taken the time to make sure we now have a process that can be implemented and that provides procedural fairness to both complainants and respondents. It is fair that we took the time to have the thorough debates and conversations we had to make sure it was implementable, because the last thing we want is to set up a system that, in practice, does not work as intended.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
2 speakers · 2 support
“As I said, we will be supporting this today because this has been a long time coming and we need an independent process, but we are so disappointed that it's taken so long and that it's a lot weaker than it should be.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“It's for that reason that the Greens support the establishment of an IPSC to hold MPs accountable for bad behaviour.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
7 speakers · 6 support · 1 mixed
“Clearly, not only embracing but enforcing behaviour standards here would have positive outcomes across both our work environment and, more broadly, in our community, but for it to work all of us in this place must accept that this workplace should reflect the nation's values and meet our community's expectations. While this bill is welcomed, then, it is weaker than many had hoped, and for this reason I move the amendments circulated in my name. We must continue to advocate for greater ambition, to not only ensure any parliamentary workplace is respectful and inclusive but also, ultimately, to ensure it reflects everything our community wants us to be.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I support this bill but I want to acknowledge it is not perfect. As I mentioned earlier, if the commission were to make a finding against a parliamentarian that would attract a serious sanction—a fine, suspension, discharge from a committee—it would have to refer this to the privileges committee. The commission will not make a recommendation of which sanction would be appropriate, and the report they provide to the privileges committee would not be published nor tabled in parliament. It would then be up to the privileges committee to make a finding against that MP and recommend a sanction for the parliament to vote on. It would also be up to the Privileges Committee to name that MP in any reports it made to parliament. I share the concerns of many about these aspects of the bill. Fair Agenda have undertaken significant work on these reforms and share this concern, because this means serious findings could be made about an MP but they could face no sanction, the public would never know, and that's a problem. The bad behaviour of parliamentarians should not be swept under the rug, because of the nature of the office that they hold.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Ultimately, I support the legislation because it's overdue and we need it, but we need to be open to whether or not further amendments are going to be needed to ensure there is greater direction given to the privileges committee and accountability of the privileges committee in how it gets there.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise to speak in support of the Parliamentary Workplace Support Service Amendment (Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission) Bill 2024. The legislation represents an essential step towards addressing the deep-rooted issues that have plagued our parliamentary workplace for too long. I commend the work of the Parliamentary Leadership Taskforce, including the member for Warringah, in getting us to this point.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This piece of legislation could have gone further, but it is a huge and necessary step up, and I will support it. It's arguably fair, independent and finds a balance between being confidential and transparent, even if it's not exactly the balance that I might have preferred. I commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The members for North Sydney and Clark are both moving amendments along those lines, and they will have my support. I urge members of the major parties to support them too because the accounts of bullying and harassment reported to Set the standard show just how poorly this parliament has rated as a workplace. The accounts of bullying and harassment are, quite frankly, appalling and demand drastic remedies rather than halfway measures.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise to fully support the Parliamentary Workplace Support Service Amendment (Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission) Bill 2024. It is a vast improvement on the previous system, and I sincerely wish it had been brought in sooner, as my colleagues have raised. In the efforts to raise the standards in this place, it brings more rigour to the process and higher standards of review, which will ensure that the review is more just.”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 · Referred to Federation Chamber
Referred to Federation Chamber
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Returned to House for further consideration
Returned to House for further consideration
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading agreed to
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
House · 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
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Senate · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Senate · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Second reading agreed to
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 · 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 the bill into an Act and makes the new system law., turning the bill into an Act.
