This bill did not become law and is no longer proceeding.
Education & skills
Universities approved for Commonwealth funding would have to follow the new national codeThe proposed national rulebook that would set the standards universities must follow on prevention, response and accountability for gender-based violence. on preventing and responding to gender-based violence as part of their quality and accountability duties.
High rates of gender-based violence in universities, plus confusing and unsatisfactory complaint processes, exposed a serious safety gap for students and staff. This bill ties the new national codeThe proposed national rulebook that would set the standards universities must follow on prevention, response and accountability for gender-based violence. to higher education funding and approval rules, so providers must meet it or risk consequences for non-compliance.
Australia already had Commonwealth higher education funding rules, but evidence from the 2021 National Student Survey and later official material showed persistent sexual assault, sexual harassment and unsatisfactory complaint pathways across universities. After education ministers agreed a national action planThe broader reform package agreed by education ministers that the National Code is meant to help deliver. and the National Student OmbudsmanThe new complaints body students can go to when they want to escalate a grievance about their provider, including gender-based violence complaints. began taking escalated student complaints, this bill was introduced in February 2025 to tie the proposed gender-based violence code to provider approval and funding consequences, but it lapsed when Parliament was dissolved in March 2025.
The main criticism was not of the goal, but that the scheme could be too weak or poorly designed unless implementation, independent oversight and procedural fairness were strengthened. Those concerns were raised mainly by Coalition speakers and some crossbench supporters, who still backed the bill while arguing the government should better resource compliance and address other campus safety failures such as antisemitism separately.
Hon Jason Clare MP introduced this bill. Speeches supporting it came from Labor, Greens, CLP, some crossbench members.
Did it become law?
No
The bill did not complete passage through Parliament.
Final passage
No final passage
The bill has not completed passage and is no longer proceeding.
Time before failure
50 days
From introduction to the final recorded step before the bill stopped proceeding
Meaning
Universities approved for Commonwealth funding would have to follow the new national codeThe proposed national rulebook that would set the standards universities must follow on prevention, response and accountability for gender-based violence. on preventing and responding to gender-based violence as part of their quality and accountability duties.
Universities that seriously or repeatedly fail to meet the new national codeThe proposed national rulebook that would set the standards universities must follow on prevention, response and accountability for gender-based violence. could risk losing their approval to operate under Commonwealth higher education funding law.
Public universities and other Table A and Table B providers would have to meet the new HESAThe main Commonwealth law that governs which higher education providers can be approved to receive federal funding. requirement from 1 January 2026.
Other higher education providers would get an extra year, with the new HESAThe main Commonwealth law that governs which higher education providers can be approved to receive federal funding. requirement starting for them on 1 January 2027.
These changes would not start at all unless the separate main bill creating the national codeThe proposed national rulebook that would set the standards universities must follow on prevention, response and accountability for gender-based violence. also started.
The Consequential Bill amends the Higher Education Support Act 2003 (HESA) to make compliance with the National Code a quality and accountability requirement for higher education providers approved under that Act. This will mean that a higher education provider’s non-compliance with National Code may also have consequences for that provider’s approval under HESA. For example, the Minister for Education could take action to suspend or revoke a provider’s approval under Division 22 of HESA.Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence) (Consequential Amendments) explanatory memorandum
This means that a higher education provider’s non-compliance with National Code may also have consequences for that provider’s approval under HESA. For example, the Minister for Education could take action to suspend or revoke a provider’s approval under Division 22 of HESA. Including this requirement in HESA will help to encourage and ensure compliance with the National Code by HESA approved providers and would provide an additional regulatory tool for the department in relation to serious and sustained non-compliance.Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence) (Consequential Amendments) explanatory memorandum
if the provider is a Table A provider or a Table B provider (as defined in HESA)—on 1 January 2026; orUniversities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence) (Consequential Amendments) explanatory memorandum
otherwise—on 1 January 2027.Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence) (Consequential Amendments) explanatory memorandum
However, the provisions do not commence at all if the event mentioned in paragraph (b) does not occur.Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence) (Consequential Amendments) explanatory memorandum
Context
Australia already had Commonwealth higher education funding rules, but evidence from the 2021 National Student Survey and later official material showed persistent sexual assault, sexual harassment and unsatisfactory complaint pathways across universities. After education ministers agreed a national action planThe broader reform package agreed by education ministers that the National Code is meant to help deliver. and the National Student OmbudsmanThe new complaints body students can go to when they want to escalate a grievance about their provider, including gender-based violence complaints. began taking escalated student complaints, this bill was introduced in February 2025 to tie the proposed gender-based violence code to provider approval and funding consequences, but it lapsed when Parliament was dissolved in March 2025.
National Student Survey shows widespread sexual violence and harassment
The explanatory memorandum says the 2021 National Student Survey found one in 20 students had been sexually assaulted and one in six had been sexually harassed since starting university.
Explanatory memorandum ↗Education ministers agree an action planThe broader reform package agreed by education ministers that the National Code is meant to help deliver. on gender-based violence in higher education
The explanatory memorandum identifies the Action Plan Addressing Gender-based Violence in Higher EducationThe broader reform package agreed by education ministers that the National Code is meant to help deliver. agreed on this date as the policy package that made the National CodeThe proposed national rulebook that would set the standards universities must follow on prevention, response and accountability for gender-based violence. a key reform.
Explanatory memorandum ↗National Student OmbudsmanThe new complaints body students can go to when they want to escalate a grievance about their provider, including gender-based violence complaints. starts handling escalated student complaints
The explanatory memorandum says the new ombudsman commenced on this date so students could escalate complaints about their provider, including complaints about gender-based violence.
Explanatory memorandum ↗Government introduces the consequential billA follow-on bill that changes existing laws so the main reform can operate properly. to link the code to funding approval rules
The minister said this bill formed part of a two-bill package to implement the National Higher Education Code and the explanatory memorandum says it would make compliance a HESAThe main Commonwealth law that governs which higher education providers can be approved to receive federal funding. quality and accountability requirement.
Hansard and explanatory memorandum ↗Bill lapses when Parliament is dissolved
The parliamentary timeline records that the bill lapsed at dissolution, so the proposed funding-linked enforcement changes did not pass in that Parliament.
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.
Key criticism
The main criticism was not of the goal, but that the scheme could be too weak or poorly designed unless implementation, independent oversight and procedural fairness were strengthened. Those concerns were raised mainly by Coalition speakers and some crossbench supporters, who still backed the bill while arguing the government should better resource compliance and address other campus safety failures such as antisemitism separately.
No party represented in the debate opposed the bill, but several speakers backed it with reservations about design and delivery.
Implementation may become box-ticking
Several supporters warned the code will not improve campus safety on its own unless universities and student accommodation providers get proper guidance, training and long-term funding. Their concern was that without real support, the new legal duty could turn into a compliance exercise rather than changing how institutions prevent and respond to violence.
Oversight and fairness safeguards were seen as too weak
Coalition speakers said the framework should have clearer safeguards for independence, fairness and accountability, and argued the government should have done more to support TEQSAThe national higher education regulator that some speakers wanted to see more directly supported in enforcing the rules. instead of shifting regulatory responsibility into the department. The risk they pointed to was a more centralised system without strong enough checks around how the code is enforced.
The bill was said to leave other campus harms unresolved
Some Coalition speakers argued the package should be accompanied by a separate national codeThe proposed national rulebook that would set the standards universities must follow on prevention, response and accountability for gender-based violence. on antisemitism, saying university safety reform should not stop with gender-based violence alone. This was presented as a gap in the broader response to campus misconduct, not as a reason to reject the bill itself.
Further sources
Votes
No recorded votes were found before this bill stopped proceeding.
Parliamentary debate
Start here — lead voices
Clare supports the bill as part of the wider package to implement the national higher education code on gender-based violence, and says it makes the consequential amendments needed for the main bill.
Read in Hansard ↗Blyth opposes the bill, arguing that it gives the minister overly broad delegated powers, adds another layer of bureaucracy, and risks undermining university autonomy.
Read in Hansard ↗Leeser says the coalition supports the bill because it sets up a national codeThe proposed national rulebook that would set the standards universities must follow on prevention, response and accountability for gender-based violence. to prevent and respond to gender-based violence on campus, but he wants the framework strengthened with clearer safeguards around independence, fairness and accountability.
Read in Hansard ↗Chaney supports the bill and says it is a good step toward clear, enforceable standards to prevent gender based violence in universities.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
15 speakers · 16 contributions · 15 support
“This bill is a crucial step in that regard.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I understand that there are some in the sector that have raised concerns about the regulatory burden that this may create. But to them I would say this: the burden of action for too long has fallen on students. For too long, it has fallen on victims-survivors, and those costs, psychological, educational and social, are far greater than the costs of any compliance requirements in this bill and in our broader plan to tackle this issue.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill is about ensuring that no student's future is stolen from them by sexual violence. I'm deeply proud to support it. I commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“That is why this bill is so important. This bill will force universities across Australia to take rape, sexual assault and gender based violence on campus and in residential colleges seriously.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“It is for these students, for every student, that I rise today in strong support of the bills before us—bills that establish the national higher education code to prevent and respond to gender based violence. These bills are a decisive step. They will give students the confidence and pathway to make a complaint, to be heard and respected and to have their complaints—many shocking, serious, criminal and life-shattering—acted on to achieve justice.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence) Bill is a vital step forward, but we know that legislation alone, while it leads public debate and strengthens enforcement, is not alone able to bring about the change that we need. It is not a panacea. What we're talking about here today is not just rules and regulations. We're talking about ethical disposition. We're talking about cultural practices. We're talking about change to longstanding practices where the victims were those who were subject to gender based violence. We are talking about leadership and about institutions choosing to listen, to believe and to act. This is about backing survivors who've spoken up—good on you. To every single one of you: thank you for what you've brought to the conversation, and I am so sorry for your lived experience.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We know that this is not the end of the journey—in fact, we know it is just the beginning—but it is a solid and meaningful start. The bill sets a national standard, one that makes it clear that gender based violence has no place in Australian higher education. Every student has the right to feel safe. Every staff member has the right to be respected. Every institution has a responsibility to make that a reality. I want to say thank you again to the advocates, the survivors, my colleagues and those who never gave up. I remind the Senate that this inquiry report was delivered on a consensus basis, and I hope that this bill gets that same support from all areas of the chamber, because this is one of those times where we should stand up above politics and deliver justice for these victims-survivors.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise to lend my strong support to this landmark piece of legislation introduced by the minister just now on behalf of the Albanese Labor government, one that addresses a critical issue facing our universities and indeed all of Australia, and that is gender based violence.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I am pleased that this bill shifts some of the accountability and responsibility to ensure safe environments onto institutions and providers of services to students. Stamping out gender based violence is everyone's business and requires a zero-tolerance approach in every context. It is in that spirit that I rise to support this bill, as it recognises the problem that we collectively face and proposes concrete action to address it. This bill is not just another piece of legislation; it is a bold step in our national journey towards ending gender based violence, especially in higher education. This bill will ensure that higher education providers prioritise safety, proactively strengthen prevention efforts and improve the response to gender based violence. It will hold them to account for their performance in responding to these issues, including, importantly, in student accommodation.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I commend this bill to the Chamber.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This legislation will essentially bring forward a more robust framework to address gender based violence in universities, and it builds upon the ombudsman work. It essentially puts the onus on higher education providers to introduce preventive strategies, and it will have a much stronger compliance function with penalties attached.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“For too long, students have been let down by their universities and by inaction by previous governments. That changes today. Students should be able to learn at universities and live on campus free from harassment or assault. We should do everything we can to reduce harm experienced within university settings. Let's be clear: passing this bill is not the end of the work. It's the foundation. No student should be forced to choose between their education and their safety. It's that simple.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill is long awaited, especially for students and victims-survivors. I commend it to the Senate.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Jason Clare on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Minister's second reading speech
Clare supports the bill as part of the wider package to implement the national higher education code on gender-based violence, and says it makes the consequential amendments needed for the main bill.
“This bill is part of a package of two bills which together will implement the National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence in universities. This bill makes consequential amendments necessary to implement the measures in the main bill, which I just introduced. Full details of the measures are contained in the explanatory memorandum. I commend this bill to the House.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Clare supports the bill and recommends it to the House because it provides the consequential changes needed to implement the national codeThe proposed national rulebook that would set the standards universities must follow on prevention, response and accountability for gender-based violence. on preventing and responding to gender-based violence in universities. He says the government will not support the second reading amendment at this time.
“This bill is part of a package of two bills which together will implement the National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence in universities. This bill makes consequential amendments necessary to implement the measures in the main bill, which I just introduced. Full details of the measures are contained in the explanatory memorandum, and I commend this bill to the House.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“These bills provide for the establishment and enforcement of a national higher education code to prevent and respond to gender based violence. They are an important step in making students and staff safer on our campuses. I thank senators across the chamber for their contributions to this debate.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
7 speakers · 9 contributions · 6 support · 1 mixed
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Julian Leeser on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Leeser says the coalition supports the bill because it sets up a national codeThe proposed national rulebook that would set the standards universities must follow on prevention, response and accountability for gender-based violence. to prevent and respond to gender-based violence on campus, but he wants the framework strengthened with clearer safeguards around independence, fairness and accountability. He also says the government should have done more to back TEQSAThe national higher education regulator that some speakers wanted to see more directly supported in enforcing the rules. rather than shifting the regulatory role into the department.
“The coalition supports these bills and, of course, their purpose, which is to establish a national code to prevent and respond to gender based violence in higher education. They affirm that everyone on a university campus, be they students or staff, and residents as well, has the absolute right to be safe.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Leeser says the coalition will support the bill and wants it to succeed, but argues it must be backed by stronger implementation and an additional national codeThe proposed national rulebook that would set the standards universities must follow on prevention, response and accountability for gender-based violence. focused on antisemitism. He says the reform should be judged by outcomes on campus safety, not slogans or centralising power.
“We should also be honest about what we do not yet know. Not every program works in every setting. We should be evidence led and open to refinement. We will judge this reform by outcomes: fewer incidents, higher confidence of students to report, faster and fairer resolutions and a better culture on campus. It behoves all of us in this place to revisit these issues as required in light of the results. Constructive bipartisanship matters here. There is no monopoly on compassion, and there should be no tolerance for complacency. That's the spirit in which the coalition's concerns are raised—concern for results on the ground that will improve the safety of our students and our staff in our centres of higher learning. It is this same spirit that I hope will support the second reading amendment. I commend the bill to the House and I move:”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“I rise to join with my colleagues in indicating the coalition does strongly support the Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence) Bill 2025 and its purpose, and that is to establish a national code to prevent and respond to gender-based violence in higher education.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“So it does beg the question of why we are waiting for the report relating to the activities related to Islamophobia before we act on the special envoy's report. We do commend this second reading amendment to the Senate, and, as I indicated before, the coalition will support this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The coalition strongly supports the Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence) Bill and its purpose, as I have outlined, in establishing a national code to prevent and respond to gender based violence in our universities and in higher education. We affirm that everyone on a university campus—students, staff and residents—have the right to be safe as they work and as they learn.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“While the coalition does have some concerns about giving regulatory authority to the Department of Education, rather than strengthening the independent regulator, we are supportive of this bill. Sexual assault and sexual harassment are unacceptable in any context, and the statistics reported in Universities Australia's 2021 National student safety survey around incidents on university campuses are incredibly concerning. Every student deserves to feel safe when they go to their place of education. That is why the coalition supports the purpose of this bill—to establish a national code to prevent and respond to gender based violence.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“On that basis, I am very, very, very pleased to have the opportunity to speak in favour of the Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence) Bill 2025. In doing so, I also would like to acknowledge all the victims-survivors who have suffered the unbelievable trauma they've suffered on campuses and who have then been retraumatised by the way in which the institutions have responded—in some cases in an absolutely callous and cruel way. I acknowledge each and every one of those victims-survivors.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Leah Blyth on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Blyth says the coalition supports the bill because universities need stronger action to prevent and respond to gender based violence and improve student safety. She nevertheless questions whether the government's enforcement approach is appropriate, pointing to the serious penalties and loss of accreditation it can impose on providers.
“Creating a national code to prevent and respond to gender based violence in universities is, of course, a noble intention, and the coalition is supporting the Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence) Bill 2025.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Blyth opposes the bill, arguing that it gives the minister overly broad delegated powers, adds another layer of bureaucracy, and risks undermining university autonomy. She says the government should focus on stronger and broader campus safety measures, including antisemitism, instead of this approach.
“Is it really appropriate for a bill of this magnitude to not actually set out the national code and to give the minister such broad powers? At clause 17(q), it says the national code may 'include any other matters that the minister considers are necessary or convenient to give effect to the purpose of the national code'. The broadness of the powers in this bill and the ambiguous nature of its provisions must be questioned in this chamber.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
2 speakers · 2 support
“The Greens are proud to support this bill. We have worked for years with advocates and activists and welcome this step in preventing and tackling sexual violence on campus, something my colleague Senator Waters and I have passionately pushed for for years. We look forward to seeing the code mandated as soon as possible so students don't have to wait any longer for these crucial safety protections.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise today to speak in strong support of the Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence) Bill 2025. This bill enables the minister to make a national higher education code to prevent and respond to gender based violence—not that you would know that from the contribution from the opposition education spokesperson, but I suppose it's pretty typical of the Liberals to ignore and erase women. The national code is in fact about gender based violence, and it's the next step in responding to the Australian Universities Accord interim report, after we've already had the creation of the National Student Ombudsman and the Action Plan Addressing Gender-based Violence in Higher Education. The Greens support this bill, and we welcome this next step in both preventing and tackling sexual violence on campus.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
4 speakers · 4 support
“Where does that leave us? Well, this bill is, in principle, a good step. It acknowledges that sexual assault and sexual harassment in universities is not a marginal issue and more must be done. It provides for a national code to establish clear, enforceable standards. It creates mechanisms for accountability and enforcement, and it affirms that every student deserves to feel safe and supported in their place of learning. I'm heartened by the goodwill of the stakeholders. Universities, student accommodation providers, student guilds and students themselves all want universities to be safer places, but the concerns listed here show how much work is still to be done to ensure that universities and student accommodation providers are realistically able to comply with the code.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise to speak in support of the Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence) Bill 2025 and I do so with a sense of pride, having pushed for this action against sexual violence at universities, but also with a strong sense of urgency because, while this bill is a welcome step forward in keeping students safe on campus, the scale of harm facing students demands serious and sustained action.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“For far too many students—for far too many women—this legislation comes too late. But those of us in this House now commend this government for acting now as it has to prevent further harm to those who come after. I commend this bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“So I welcome this bill, and I'm optimistic that this bill will set the groundwork to help build a safe, accountable environment for our young adults on university campuses. However, guidance and long-term investment to ensure universities are well equipped to meet these obligations remain necessary.”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 · Lapsed at dissolution
Lapsed at dissolution
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
