This bill became law on Feb 20th, 2025.
Law, justice & rights
People appealing an Administrative Review TribunalThe new federal body that reviews many government decisions, replacing the old Administrative Appeals Tribunal. decision to the Federal CourtThe court people can appeal to after a tribunal decision, if the law allows an appeal. do not lose appeal time over the Christmas and New Year shutdown period.
The new Administrative Review TribunalThe new federal body that reviews many government decisions, replacing the old Administrative Appeals Tribunal. left gaps and inconsistent review deadlines, including Christmas appeal timing and some education debt reviews. This bill standardises tribunal time limits and filing rules, restores review rights, and stops original decisions being changed after a matter reaches the guidance and appeals panelA special tribunal panel used for cases that raise important legal or systemic issues..
After Parliament abolished the Administrative Appeals TribunalThe former federal tribunal that heard many review cases before the new tribunal replaced it. and created the Administrative Review TribunalThe new federal body that reviews many government decisions, replacing the old Administrative Appeals Tribunal. in 2024, ministers identified practical gaps in the new system, including inconsistent review deadlines across laws, a Christmas-New Year trap in Federal CourtThe court people can appeal to after a tribunal decision, if the law allows an appeal. appeal timing, anomalous limits on ABSTUDYA federal education support program, mentioned here because the bill changes the time limit for debt review decisions under it. and Assistance for Isolated ChildrenA federal payment program for students in remote areas, with debt review rules changed by this bill. debt reviews, and uncertainty around migration review applications. The Administrative Review Tribunal (Miscellaneous Measures) Bill 2024The cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. was introduced to make those rules work properly across existing statutes, and it completed that cleanup when Parliament passed it in February 2025 and it received Royal AssentThe final step that turns a passed bill into law. soon after.
The main criticism was that the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. was needed to clean up drafting mistakes and rushed design choices in the new tribunal laws, creating avoidable loopholes, uncertainty and operational problems such as risks around migration review rules and tribunal registryThe tribunal office where applications and other documents are lodged and managed. access. That case was raised most strongly by Coalition speakers and echoed in narrower form by others, but criticism was mostly about the government's implementation and safeguards rather than broad opposition to the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system.'s overall purpose.
Mark Dreyfus MP introduced this bill. It passed on the voices.
Did it become law?
Yes
Became law 20 Feb 2025
Final passage
Passed without a counted vote
2 recorded amendment or procedural votes were found, but no counted vote on the bill itself was recorded.
Passage speed
183 days
From introduction to the latest recorded parliamentary step
Meaning
People appealing an Administrative Review TribunalThe new federal body that reviews many government decisions, replacing the old Administrative Appeals Tribunal. decision to the Federal CourtThe court people can appeal to after a tribunal decision, if the law allows an appeal. do not lose appeal time over the Christmas and New Year shutdown period.
People challenging ABSTUDYA federal education support program, mentioned here because the bill changes the time limit for debt review decisions under it. or Assistance for Isolated ChildrenA federal payment program for students in remote areas, with debt review rules changed by this bill. debt decisions can now seek internal review and Tribunal review without a three-month deadline.
Migration and protection visa reviewThe tribunal process for challenging certain migration and refugee-related visa decisions. applications must meet the stated filing, document, fee and eligibility rules, or the Administrative Review TribunalThe new federal body that reviews many government decisions, replacing the old Administrative Appeals Tribunal. cannot hear them.
Across many federal laws, review deadlines for decisions that are treated as made because a deadline passed are standardised under the Administrative Review TribunalThe new federal body that reviews many government decisions, replacing the old Administrative Appeals Tribunal. rules.
Once a matter is sent to the Administrative Review TribunalThe new federal body that reviews many government decisions, replacing the old Administrative Appeals Tribunal.’s guidance and appeals panelA special tribunal panel used for cases that raise important legal or systemic issues., the original government decision usually cannot be changed behind the scenes without the Tribunal and parties agreeing.
This Bill amends section 174 of the ART Act to provide that the timeframe to apply for an appeal to the Federal Court of Australia does not include the period between 24 December in one year and 14 January in the next year. This advances access to justice by supporting equal access to legal representation without limiting choice of legal services due to firm shutdown or other availability issues over the holiday period.Administrative Review Tribunal (Miscellaneous Measures) explanatory memorandum
This item will disapply section 18 of the ART Act (which deals with when applications for review may be made) and remove the three-month time limit to apply for review in the Tribunal of a debt decision under the Student Assistance Act 1973. The effect of these amendments will be to ensure applications to seek a review for a debt decision in relation to an ABSTUDY or AIC payment align with other social security payments, which do not impose a time limit for seeking review of a debt decision.Administrative Review Tribunal (Miscellaneous Measures) explanatory memorandum
This item repeals and replaces subsection 348(2) of the Migration Act to explicitly state that the Tribunal must not review an application made under sections 347 and 347A of the Migration Act that is not properly made. The effect of this amendment is that the Tribunal will not have jurisdiction to review an application made under Part 5 of the Migration Act if it is not properly made. This sits alongside existing subsection 348(1) which provides that the Tribunal must review an application which has been properly made. Together, these provisions put beyond doubt how the Tribunal is to deal with applications for reviewable migration decisions and reviewable protection decisions.Administrative Review Tribunal (Miscellaneous Measures) explanatory memorandum
Removal of provisions that provide a timeframe to apply for review of a deemed decision will ensure there are consistent arrangements in relation to the calculation of timeframes to apply for review of deemed decisions. This will provide consistency for users and reduce administrative burden for the Tribunal. These amendments do not substantively change the timeframes for applying for review of the relevant decisions. This is because all of the existing provisions specify that the timeframe to apply for review ends either 28 days from, or 28 days after, the decision is deemed to be made.Administrative Review Tribunal (Miscellaneous Measures) explanatory memorandum
A number of items in this Schedule make amendments to harmonise the application of section 31 of the ART Act where a decision has been referred to the guidance and appeals panel. Some legislation disapplies or applies contrary to the operation of section 31 of the ART Act, thereby allowing for a decision to be altered by the decision maker while the decision is before the Tribunal. The amendments provide that where a decision is before the guidance and appeals panel, section 31 of the ART Act applies to the decision. This means that the decision cannot be altered, otherwise than by the Tribunal, unless the parties to the proceeding for review and the Tribunal consent to the alteration or it is remitted to the decision‑maker under section 85 of the ART Act.Administrative Review Tribunal (Miscellaneous Measures) explanatory memorandum
Context
After Parliament abolished the Administrative Appeals TribunalThe former federal tribunal that heard many review cases before the new tribunal replaced it. and created the Administrative Review TribunalThe new federal body that reviews many government decisions, replacing the old Administrative Appeals Tribunal. in 2024, ministers identified practical gaps in the new system, including inconsistent review deadlines across laws, a Christmas-New Year trap in Federal CourtThe court people can appeal to after a tribunal decision, if the law allows an appeal. appeal timing, anomalous limits on ABSTUDYA federal education support program, mentioned here because the bill changes the time limit for debt review decisions under it. and Assistance for Isolated ChildrenA federal payment program for students in remote areas, with debt review rules changed by this bill. debt reviews, and uncertainty around migration review applications. The Administrative Review Tribunal (Miscellaneous Measures) Bill 2024The cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. was introduced to make those rules work properly across existing statutes, and it completed that cleanup when Parliament passed it in February 2025 and it received Royal AssentThe final step that turns a passed bill into law. soon after.
Administrative Review TribunalThe new federal body that reviews many government decisions, replacing the old Administrative Appeals Tribunal. Act receives Royal AssentThe final step that turns a passed bill into law.
The main law creating the new Administrative Review TribunalThe new federal body that reviews many government decisions, replacing the old Administrative Appeals Tribunal. became law as part of the package replacing the Administrative Appeals TribunalThe former federal tribunal that heard many review cases before the new tribunal replaced it..
Hansard ↗Government introduces the cleanup bill for the new tribunal
The billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. was presented to support the new tribunal by fixing technical gaps, inconsistent deadlines and filing rules across Commonwealth laws.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Minister says the new tribunal still needs practical fixes
In the second reading speech, the government said the new tribunal package needed further amendments so legislation would interact effectively with it after commencement.
Hansard ↗Administrative Review TribunalThe new federal body that reviews many government decisions, replacing the old Administrative Appeals Tribunal. begins operating
The new tribunal commenced, making the unresolved deadline, review-right and jurisdiction issues a live operational problem rather than a drafting issue alone.
Hansard ↗Parliament passes the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system.
Both houses agreed to the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system., clearing the way for standardised review timeframes, restored education-debt review rights and clearer migration application rules.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Royal AssentThe final step that turns a passed bill into law. completes the tribunal rule cleanup
Royal AssentThe final step that turns a passed bill into law. turned the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. into law, finalising the legislative fixes for holiday appeal timing, deemed-decision deadlines and guidance and appeals panelA special tribunal panel used for cases that raise important legal or systemic issues. processes.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Legislative route
The billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. 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 billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system.'s purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
The billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Referred to Federation Chamber
The billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Second reading debate
The chamber agreed to the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. at second reading, meaning it accepted the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
The billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Reported from Federation Chamber
The chamber agreed to the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. 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 billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. 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 billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system.'s purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
Referred to Committee (12/09/2024): SenateThe parliamentary chamber that considered and amended the bill before it became law. Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (31/10/2024)
Referred to committee
APH bill page notesThe billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The chamber agreed to the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. at second reading, meaning it accepted the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
The chamber considered amendments before the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. moved to the next stage.
Committee of the Whole debate
The chamber considered amendments before the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. moved to the next stage.
Committee of the Whole debate
The chamber agreed to the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Third reading agreed to
The billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The House dealt with SenateThe parliamentary chamber that considered and amended the bill before it became law. amendments or requests so both chambers could settle the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. in the same form. The main amendments were: The official record shows eight recorded amendment outcomes, but only two were counted divisions: the government migration-review deadline amendment carried 38-30, and the Greens fast-track protection-refusal amendment was defeated 15-28.
Consideration of SenateThe parliamentary chamber that considered and amended the bill before it became law. message
Both houses passed the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. 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., turning the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. into an Act.
Key criticism
The main criticism was that the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. was needed to clean up drafting mistakes and rushed design choices in the new tribunal laws, creating avoidable loopholes, uncertainty and operational problems such as risks around migration review rules and tribunal registryThe tribunal office where applications and other documents are lodged and managed. access. That case was raised most strongly by Coalition speakers and echoed in narrower form by others, but criticism was mostly about the government's implementation and safeguards rather than broad opposition to the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system.'s overall purpose.
Criticism was real but mostly conditional, with no party represented in the debate opposing the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system.'s final passage.
Rushed drafting created avoidable legal and operational problems
Coalition speakers argued the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. existed largely because the government had rushed the new tribunal framework and produced sloppy drafting that then needed correction. They said this created loopholes, technical mistakes and unnecessary uncertainty that should have been caught before the original laws passed.
Migration provisions risked unfair or overly rigid outcomes
Critics said the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system.'s migration settings were mishandled and could produce unfair results if strict filing, document, fee and eligibility rules blocked review. The Greens' support remained tied to government amendments removing harmful migration provisions, showing this concern was significant but partly resolved before passage.
Registry and access arrangements needed stronger safeguards
A practical concern was that tribunal services could become less accessible if registryThe tribunal office where applications and other documents are lodged and managed. coverage was weakened, especially in smaller jurisdictions such as Tasmania. The opposition pushed a successful amendment requiring at least one registrarA tribunal official who handles filing, administration and some procedural functions. and one registryThe tribunal office where applications and other documents are lodged and managed. in each state and territory, indicating concern about maintaining on-the-ground access.
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 billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system.'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.
SenateThe parliamentary chamber that considered and amended the bill before it became law. agreed to the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system.'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. These cards include amendment outcomes recorded without a counted division.
House
The House agreed to the amendments made by the SenateThe parliamentary chamber that considered and amended the bill before it became law., so the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. 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
Passed 38 to 30. Support came from Labor, Greens, Australia's Voice, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, and One Nation. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
This counted vote carried the contested government deadline amendment; it was not the separate registryThe tribunal office where applications and other documents are lodged and managed. amendment, which was agreed on voices.
Defeated 15 to 28. Support came from Greens, Australia's Voice, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, One Nation, UAP, and minor parties and independents.
The defeated amendment would have created a pathway for further review of some fast-track immigration decisions; its loss left the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system.'s migration changes unchanged.
The SenateThe parliamentary chamber that considered and amended the bill before it became law. agreed on voices to Senator Cash's proposal to require at least one Administrative Review TribunalThe new federal body that reviews many government decisions, replacing the old Administrative Appeals Tribunal. registrarA tribunal official who handles filing, administration and some procedural functions. and one registryThe tribunal office where applications and other documents are lodged and managed. in each State, the ACT and the NT.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
The SenateThe parliamentary chamber that considered and amended the bill before it became law. agreed on voices to Senator Cash's proposal to require at least one Administrative Review TribunalThe new federal body that reviews many government decisions, replacing the old Administrative Appeals Tribunal. registrarA tribunal official who handles filing, administration and some procedural functions. and one registryThe tribunal office where applications and other documents are lodged and managed. in each State, the ACT and the NT.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
The SenateThe parliamentary chamber that considered and amended the bill before it became law. agreed on voices to government amendments (1) to (3) and (5) to (7).
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
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 billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. and says it completes the new Administrative Review TribunalThe new federal body that reviews many government decisions, replacing the old Administrative Appeals Tribunal. by making the technical and procedural changes needed for it to work properly.
Read in Hansard ↗Fletcher says the opposition will scrutinise the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. closely and argues it is another example of the Attorney-GeneralThe government minister responsible for the bill and for some tribunal-related legal powers. rushing out sloppy, technically flawed legislation.
Read in Hansard ↗Shoebridge says the Greens will support the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. because government amendments will remove the harmful migration provisions and improve unfair time limits, making the package more just.
Read in Hansard ↗Jenny McAllister supports the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. and says it completes the new Administrative Review TribunalThe new federal body that reviews many government decisions, replacing the old Administrative Appeals Tribunal. framework.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
5 speakers · 6 contributions · 5 support
“This Bill completes the establishment of the Tribunal and ensures that existing legislation interacts effectively with it. It amends 52 Commonwealth Acts (including the ART Act). These amendments, which are largely procedural and technical, will:”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I congratulate each of these members on their appointment, and I thank the Attorney-General for this landmark reform and his long-standing commitment to law reform and building trust in government and public institutions. This bill completes a package of reforms that establish a new administrative review tribunal and reflects the ongoing commitment of this government to reforming Australia's system of administrative review. I commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Whilst this bill is of a highly technical nature, the broader reform package reconstructing the politicised and derelict AAT as the ART will have tangible benefits for many constituents of mine. The new ART will be fair and just. It will resolve applications in a timely manner. It will be accessible and transparent and restore trust and confidence. Improving the practical functions of the ART will assist hundreds of constituents who seek administrative review of government decisions across a broad range of areas. From decisions relating to social security, the NDIS, aged care and immigration appeals, the new ART will assist applicants to reach a conclusion more efficiently and will be easier to navigate. I would like to commend the bill to the House.”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 billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. and says it completes the new Administrative Review TribunalThe new federal body that reviews many government decisions, replacing the old Administrative Appeals Tribunal. by making the technical and procedural changes needed for it to work properly. He argues the amendments will improve user experience, clarify the law, and ensure the tribunal interacts effectively with other Commonwealth legislation.
“This bill completes the establishment of the tribunal and ensures that existing legislation interacts effectively with it. These amendments, which are largely procedural and technical, will amend 52 Commonwealth acts (including the ART Act).”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Dreyfus supports the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. and says it completes the reforms creating the new Administrative Review TribunalThe new federal body that reviews many government decisions, replacing the old Administrative Appeals Tribunal.. He says it will make tribunal processes simpler, more efficient and more accessible, and criticises the opposition for trying to delay it.
“This bill completes the package of reforms that establishes the new Administrative Review Tribunal. The bill reflects the ongoing commitment of the Albanese Labor government to reforming Australia's system of administrative review. It simplifies the process for applicants and promotes a more efficient, accessible and cohesive tribunal. I look forward to the first sitting of the new tribunal on 14 October this year. I commend the bill to the House.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“The bill reflects the ongoing commitment of this government to reforming Australia's system of administrative review. It simplifies the processes for applicants and promotes a more efficient, accessible and cohesive tribunal. I commend it to the Senate.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
3 speakers · 4 contributions · 2 support · 1 oppose
“The government may wish to describe this bill as containing simply technical and machinery provisions, but time and time again the coalition have learnt, through experience, that we cannot trust this government and this Attorney-General to get the basics right. This bill requires scrutiny, and the opposition intends to examine this bill in detail to help the Attorney-General help himself. I thank the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The government knows about this problem. It has known for months about the risk it created when it rammed the legislation through—$1 billion to establish the ART. We accept their advice that they have, indeed, created a safety risk—which is shameful—for women and families using the child support system. We will, of course, pass the bill and fix the problem that the Attorney-General of Australia has created. But certainly we would hope that, despite our experiences to date—as I said, there was a first attempt and a second attempt and we are here on now the third attempt to get this legislation right—there are no other egregious errors created by what is quite frankly a rolling debacle of a process.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Paul Scarr on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Scarr says the coalition supports the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. and is moving a registryThe tribunal office where applications and other documents are lodged and managed. amendment, but argues the government rushed the legislation through and failed to allow proper scrutiny. He says that haste has already caused serious problems and the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. needed more careful consideration.
“So here we are, debating the third iteration of this bill, trying to get it right and having to address the consequences of the Attorney's rushed process. In that regard, I would like, as I did in my additional comments on this bill, which the coalition supports—we're also putting forward an amendment with respect to registries, and I think it's appropriate that we do so—to quote from the Hon Paul Fletcher MP's comments in the second reading debate in the other place.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Paul Scarr says the opposition accepts the need for the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. because it fixes urgent problems in the tribunal laws, but he argues those problems were caused by the government’s shambolic and rushed process. He says the underlying abolition of the AATThe former federal tribunal that heard many review cases before the new tribunal replaced it. was unnecessary and has produced costs, dysfunction and mistakes.
“From my perspective, as I reiterated in my additional comments on this bill, whilst I acknowledge the need for this bill, I do not acknowledge or accept that there was any real policy need for the Administrative Appeals Tribunal to be abolished holus-bolus and replaced by the Administrative Review Tribunal. It has led to costs, dysfunction and mistakes. The AAT could have been the subject of some positive reforms without its being abolished. There was a vindictive streak running through the soul of this piece of legislation, and that was reflected in the compensation paid to those tribunal members who weren't reappointed.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
1 speaker · 1 support
“I rise to indicate that the Greens will be supporting the Administrative Review Tribunal (Miscellaneous Measures) Bill 2024 as a result of amendments that will be moved by the government in committee.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
1 speaker · 1 mixed
“It's welcome that the current membership of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal will be declared vacant and that vacancies will be filled on a merit based system. My concerns are that the Administrative Review Tribunal membership will still be loaded with Labor government favourites and that the workload will still create long waiting periods before appropriate reconsideration of major decisions. It would be better to remove the review process for immigration decisions from the Administrative Review Tribunal and consider the reintroduction of a refugee or immigration review tribunal, to ensure that the Administrative Review Tribunal does not become bogged down with migration appeals, as it is currently.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Record
House · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. 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 billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system.'s purpose and principles.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Referred to Federation Chamber
Referred to Federation Chamber
The billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading agreed to
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. at second reading, meaning it accepted the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. in principle and allowed it to continue.
House · Reported from Federation Chamber
Reported from Federation Chamber
The billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Third reading agreed to
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Senate · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. 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 billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system.'s purpose and principles.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Second reading agreed to
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. at second reading, meaning it accepted the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. in principle and allowed it to continue.
Senate · Committee of the whole: amendments considered
Amendment packages agreed
The chamber considered amendments before the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. moved to the next stage.
Senate · Committee of the whole: amendments considered
Amendment packages agreed
The chamber considered amendments before the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. moved to the next stage.
Senate · Third reading agreed to
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
House · Message from Senate reported
Message from SenateThe parliamentary chamber that considered and amended the bill before it became law. reported
The billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Consideration of Senate message
House agreed to SenateThe parliamentary chamber that considered and amended the bill before it became law. amendments
The House dealt with SenateThe parliamentary chamber that considered and amended the bill before it became law. amendments or requests so both chambers could settle the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. in the same form.
Parliament · Finally passed both Houses
Passed both houses
Both houses passed the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. 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., turning the billThe cleanup bill that fixed gaps, deadlines and filing rules in the new tribunal system. into an Act.
Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (31/10/2024)
Referred to committee
Referred to Committee (12 Sept 2024): Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (31 Oct 2024)
APH bill page notes
