Too little scrutiny before passage
Coalition speakers argued the bill should be rejected or delayed for a Senate inquiry because it created a significant new public health body with serious powers.
Australian Centre for Disease Control
Current status
This bill became law on Nov 10th, 2025.
Policy area
Health, care & disability
What does this bill do?
Creates the Australian Centre for Disease Control as a permanent national public health body to monitor risks, support prevention, and help Australia prepare for future health crises.
Why was it introduced?
COVID-19 exposed gaps in national pandemic readiness, including weak data sharing, fragmented planning and no single national public health authority. The bill creates a permanent Australian CDC to provide independent evidence-based advice, improve national data and preparedness, and publish key public health adviceExpert advice about health risks affecting the community, such as disease outbreaks, emergency planning or ways to reduce harm. by default.
Broader context
The bill grew out of the COVID-19 experience and later reviews that found Australia lacked a single national public health authority, strong data sharing and clear emergency planning. The government said the Australian CDC would start on 1 January 2026 with an initial focus on communicable disease, pandemic preparednessPlanning, systems and resources put in place before a major disease outbreak spreads widely across countries., environmental health and occupational respiratory disease, while several supporters pushed for a broader role in chronic disease, disability, climate and prevention from the beginning.
Key criticism
The main criticisms were about safeguards and scope, not simply whether Australia should have a CDC. Coalition speakers said the bill needed more scrutiny and stronger limits on secrecy and data sharing. Crossbench and Greens supporters generally backed the CDC but wanted it to cover chronic disease, climate-related health risks, disability perspectives and prevention more clearly from the start.
Who supported it?
Hon Mark Butler MP introduced this bill. It passed on the voices.
Introduced in House 03 Sept 2025
Passed House 27 Oct 2025
Passed Senate 05 Nov 2025
Became law 10 Nov 2025
Did it become law?
Yes
Became law 10 Nov 2025
Final passage
Passed without a counted vote
Members called out ‘aye’ or ‘no’ — no individual votes were recorded.
Passage speed
68 days
From introduction to the latest recorded parliamentary step
Meaning
What does this bill do?
-
Creates the Australian Centre for Disease Control as a permanent national public health body to monitor risks, support prevention, and help Australia prepare for future health crises.
-
Makes the Director-GeneralThe head of the Australian Centre for Disease Control, responsible for its work, governance and public health advice. the public health chiefThe head of the Australian Centre for Disease Control, responsible for its work, governance and public health advice. for the Australian CDC, with independence in giving advice, making decisions and exercising powers under the Act.
-
Requires public health adviceExpert advice about health risks affecting the community, such as disease outbreaks, emergency planning or ways to reduce harm. that recommends action, or recommends against action, to be published by default, subject to exceptions such as privacy and protected material.
-
Sets up national public health data functions so governments can detect risks earlier, plan better and share or link information for public health activities with safeguards.
-
Creates an expert Advisory Council to advise the Director-GeneralThe head of the Australian Centre for Disease Control, responsible for its work, governance and public health advice. on public health matters and the Australian CDC’s strategic direction and priorities.
Show source excerpts
-
The Australian Centre for Disease Control Bill 2025 (the Bill) would establish the Australian Centre for Disease Control (Australian CDC) as a statutory Commonwealth public health authority. The Australian CDC would permanently monitor and assess health risks; proactively work to prevent them; and prepare Australia for another health crisis.
Australian Centre for Disease Control explanatory memorandum -
The Bill establishes the Director-General as the single accountable authority of the Australian CDC with responsibility for the overall governance of the entity. The Director-General would have discretion in the performance and exercise of their powers, duties and functions and cannot be directed by the Minister.
Australian Centre for Disease Control explanatory memorandum -
The Bill would require the Director-General to publish, by default, the Australian CDC’s advice to government, if it contains recommendations to take or not take an action.
Australian Centre for Disease Control explanatory memorandum -
The Australian CDC will deliver a modern approach to national public health data to enable more accurate and faster detection of risks, more consistent responses across borders, and a stronger foundation for national public health planning. But the CDC won't act alone—Australians expect all levels of government to work together when public health is on the line. That is why this bill streamlines data sharing and authorises linkage across the Commonwealth, and with state and territory governments who choose to do so, to support public health activities. The bill includes strong safeguards to ensure that any data sharing serves the public interest without compromising privacy.
Minister's second reading speech -
The Bill establishes an Advisory Council to advise the Director-General. The Advisory Council would comprise experts from both health and non-health sectors to advise the Director-General on public health matters and on the strategic direction and priorities of the agency.
Australian Centre for Disease Control explanatory memorandum
Context
Broader context for this bill
The bill grew out of the COVID-19 experience and later reviews that found Australia lacked a single national public health authority, strong data sharing and clear emergency planning. The government said the Australian CDC would start on 1 January 2026 with an initial focus on communicable disease, pandemic preparednessPlanning, systems and resources put in place before a major disease outbreak spreads widely across countries., environmental health and occupational respiratory disease, while several supporters pushed for a broader role in chronic disease, disability, climate and prevention from the beginning.
- 2020-2022
COVID-19 exposes national public health gaps
Government speeches and debate said the pandemic showed Australia lacked a clear playbook, had weak data sharing and struggled with fragmented planning across governments.
Minister's second reading speech ↗ - 2022-2025
Consultation shapes a permanent Australian CDC
The minister said the bill followed more than three years of policy development and consultation with governments, community groups, business, unions, experts and the public.
Minister's second reading speech ↗ - September 2023
Government asks experts to review the COVID-19 response
The minister said the government asked an independent panel to examine Australia’s pandemic response and consider how systems could better anticipate, adapt and respond.
Minister's second reading speech ↗ - 03 Sept 2025
Government introduces the Australian CDC bill
The bill was introduced in the House of Representatives to establish the Australian CDC as a statutory agency in the Health, Disability and Ageing portfolio.
Parliamentary timeline ↗ - 09 Oct 2025
Crossbench MPs push for a broader CDC remit
Independent MPs supported establishing the CDC but argued the bill should do more on chronic disease prevention, climate-related health risks, independence and review arrangements.
House second reading debate ↗ - 04 Nov 2025
Senate debate focuses on chronic disease, disability and safeguards
Greens and crossbench speakers supported the CDC while seeking stronger chronic disease, disability and climate measures; Coalition speakers focused on transparency, privacy and scrutiny concerns.
Senate second reading debate ↗ - 06 Nov 2025
Parliament passes the bill with Senate amendments
The Senate agreed to Australian Greens amendments in committee of the whole, and the House later agreed to the Senate amendments before the bill finally passed both houses.
Parliamentary timeline ↗
Legislative route
How did it move through Parliament?
House Senate
Introduced 03 Sept 2025
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
Second reading opened 03 Sept 2025
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
Second reading debate 08 Oct 2025
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Second reading debate 09 Oct 2025
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Second reading debate 27 Oct 2025
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House second reading agreed 27 Oct 2025
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
Consideration in detail debate 27 Oct 2025
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House third reading agreed 27 Oct 2025
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber. Later message exchanges with the other chamber were still recorded afterwards.
Third reading agreed to
Introduced 27 Oct 2025
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
Second reading opened 27 Oct 2025
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
Second reading debate 30 Oct 2025
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Second reading debate 04 Nov 2025
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate second reading agreed 05 Nov 2025
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
Senate agreed to amendment packages 05 Nov 2025
The Senate considered the bill in committee of the whole and agreed to six Australian Greens amendments before the bill proceeded to third reading.
Committee of the Whole debate
Senate third reading agreed 05 Nov 2025
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Third reading agreed to
Message from Senate reported 05 Nov 2025
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House agreed to Senate amendments on Senate review 06 Nov 2025
The House considered the Senate message and agreed to the amendments made by the Senate, allowing the bill to pass both houses in the same form. The main amendments were: The APH progress table records that the Senate agreed to six Australian Greens committee amendments and that the House then agreed to the Senate amendments.
Consideration of Senate message
Passed both houses 06 Nov 2025
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Finally passed both Houses
Assent 10 Nov 2025
The Governor-General gave Royal Assent, turning the bill into an Act.
Key criticism
The main case against this bill
The main criticisms were about safeguards and scope, not simply whether Australia should have a CDC. Coalition speakers said the bill needed more scrutiny and stronger limits on secrecy and data sharing. Crossbench and Greens supporters generally backed the CDC but wanted it to cover chronic disease, climate-related health risks, disability perspectives and prevention more clearly from the start.
Most criticism in the local record accepted the need for stronger public health preparedness; the dispute was over powers, transparency, independence and how broad the CDC should be at launch.
Transparency and FOI concerns
Opposition speakers said the Director-GeneralThe head of the Australian Centre for Disease Control, responsible for its work, governance and public health advice. would have too much discretion to withhold public health adviceExpert advice about health risks affecting the community, such as disease outbreaks, emergency planning or ways to reduce harm. and that the bill did not provide enough external review or accountability.
Data sharing safeguards
The Opposition argued data-sharing declarations needed stronger oversight, including Australian Information Commissioner agreement and court orders for some enforcement-related uses.
CDC scope too narrow at launch
Crossbench and Greens supporters said the CDC should include chronic disease, prevention, climate-related health risks and disability perspectives earlier and more explicitly.
Further sources
Votes
Recorded votes
How the bill itself passed
The bill passed both chambers on the voices, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes for final passage.
Passed House passed the bill
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
House passed the bill
Passed on the voices
In a voice vote, members call out Aye or No and the presiding officer judges which side has it. Individual names are only recorded if a formal division is called.
Passed Senate passed the bill
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
Senate passed the bill
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 at a glance
Amendments grouped by chamber. Where APH reports aggregate counts, the package card summarizes the matching public amendment sheets by source theme.
Senate
Carried Australian Greens package: 6 amendments
Australian Greens amendments added disability expertise to the Advisory Council, expanded the Director-General’s public health functions to include research and workforce expertise, added disability, infection and occupational health bodies to the consultation framework, and required annual reporting on pandemic preparedness and climate-related health impacts.
Carried
Australian Greens package: 6 amendments
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.
Parliamentary debate
Who spoke, and what they said
Start here — lead voices
Sponsor speech Supports
Mark Butler
Butler urges the House to pass the bill, saying it will create an independent Australian Centre for Disease Control to strengthen public health capability, improve pandemic preparednessPlanning, systems and resources put in place before a major disease outbreak spreads widely across countries. and better protect Australians from future health threats.
Read in Hansard ↗ Lead opposing voice Opposes
Ben Small
Ben Small says the Coalition will oppose the bill unless there is a full Senate inquiry first, arguing it transfers serious health powers to a new and unclear body without enough scrutiny, transparency or accountability.
Read in Hansard ↗ Lead supporting voice Supports
Monique Ryan
Ryan supports creating the Australian Centre for Disease Control and wants the bill to pass, but says it should be strengthened so the agency tackles chronic disease, climate related health risks and prevention from the start.
Read in Hansard ↗ Lead non-major voice Opposes
Sophie Scamps
Scamps says she supports creating an Australian CDC in principle, but she moves a substitute second reading amendment because she thinks the bill should be changed to include chronic disease prevention from the start and be strengthened on independence, climate and funding.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
Labor
14 speakers · 17 contributions · 14 support
Labor
14 speakers · 17 contributions · 14 support
-
Mark Butler ★ 2 contributions Butler urges the House to pass the bill, saying it will create an independent Australian Centre for Disease Control to strengthen public health capability, improve pandemic preparednessPlanning, systems and resources put in place before a major disease outbreak spreads widely across countries. and better protect Australians from future health threats.
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Mark Butler on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Minister's second reading speech
Butler urges the House to pass the bill, saying it will create an independent Australian Centre for Disease Control to strengthen public health capability, improve pandemic preparednessPlanning, systems and resources put in place before a major disease outbreak spreads widely across countries. and better protect Australians from future health threats. He argues the new statutory agency is needed to fix gaps exposed by the COVID-19 response and provide trusted national advice and coordination.
“Establishing a permanent Australian CDC through this bill will deliver on our commitment to create an independent agency that will help protect Australia from diseases and public health threats.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗Second reading speech
Butler supports the bill and wants it passed because it creates a permanent, independent Australian CDC to improve pandemic preparednessPlanning, systems and resources put in place before a major disease outbreak spreads widely across countries., public health data, transparency and accountability. He says the reform is overdue and will better protect Australians from future health threats.
“This bill establishes a permanent, evidence based institution to ensure that Australia is better prepared, more united and more accountable in the face of future public health threats. It is a long-overdue reform, one that honours the hard lessons of the past and builds a stronger, healthier future for all Australians. I commend the bill to the House.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗ -
Shayne Neumann Neumann strongly backs the bill and says it should pass because Australia was underprepared for COVID and needs an independent national disease control centre to improve data sharing, advice and future pandemic readiness.
“This bill, along with the Australian Centre for Disease Control (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill, delivers an independent statutory agency that will bring critical information experts to protect Australia from diseases and other public health threats. And those opposite today, when given the opportunity, will vote against it. The Australian CDC will provide high-quality analysis and advice on public health risks to government and the Australian community. It will streamline our public health data-sharing and linkages across the Commonwealth, state and territory governments.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Claire Clutterham Claire Clutterham supports the bill and says Australia needs the new Centre for Disease Control to be a trusted, evidence-based national authority that improves pandemic preparednessPlanning, systems and resources put in place before a major disease outbreak spreads widely across countries. and public health coordination.
“We know we weren't prepared last time. The establishment of the Australian CDC is critical to ensuring that we are prepared next time and can better protect the health and wellbeing of Australians in a fair way that is proportionate to the risks.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Matt Smith Matt Smith supports the bill and wants it passed because he says Australia was unprepared for COVID-19 and needs an independent, science-led Centre for Disease Control to improve pandemic preparednessPlanning, systems and resources put in place before a major disease outbreak spreads widely across countries., data and advice.
“Whether it's vaccines, masks or any kind of pandemic response, we should listen to those who know what they're talking about. By having a strong and independent CDC, we can make sure that our professionals and experts on the front line fighting these pandemics have the authority, the data and the information to keep us safe. This is another example of Labor building a strong health system and assuring a bright future for my electorate. I commend the bill to the House.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Ed Husic Ed Husic supports the bill, saying Australia should create a national centre for disease control to improve long term public health coordination and learn the lessons of the pandemic, especially for vulnerable communities.
“The reason I speak on this bill is that, if we've learnt anything out of that pandemic, it's the need to better coordinate, to not treat people in different regions differently and to be able to do what we can to coordinate a response—particularly standing up greater levels of support for vulnerable communities. In large part, the way to do that, I would argue to the House, is setting up something like a CDC that can do just that and work across jurisdictions. I hope, when we say we've learned the lessons of the pandemic, we genuinely mean it, and I'm proud of the fact that this CDC is evidence we may be doing something to do better.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Ash Ambihaipahar Ash Ambihaipahar supports the bill and says it should create an independent Australian Centre for Disease Control to improve public health adviceExpert advice about health risks affecting the community, such as disease outbreaks, emergency planning or ways to reduce harm., data sharing and pandemic preparednessPlanning, systems and resources put in place before a major disease outbreak spreads widely across countries. after the failures of the COVID response.
“As you can tell from my experience and what my electorate and, I'm sure, a lot of people across Australia have experienced, it is something we cannot go through again. My biggest concern is the amount of distrust and damage the coalition government did to the institution of the federal government and the public health system at a time when there was so much uncertainty—also letting down the state and territory leadership. The CDC is about never repeating the same mistakes that the coalition government made in the lead-up to and during the COVID-19 pandemic. This is about restoring faith in the people to trust good, independent public health advice—restoring their trust in government—because this Labor government is proactively working to address this through the bill.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Gabriel Ng Ng supports the bill and wants it passed, saying it will create an independent national disease control agency to improve preparedness, coordination and trust in public health adviceExpert advice about health risks affecting the community, such as disease outbreaks, emergency planning or ways to reduce harm. after the failures exposed by COVID-19.
“This bill lays the foundation for a national agency that will protect Australians from the health threats of tomorrow. That is what Labor governments do. We strengthen the health system and invest in the long-term wellbeing of our communities. The last time Australia had a national preventive health agency was under a Labor government. Once again, it is Labor taking the responsibility to ensure that Australians have the health protection they deserve. That is the vision of the Albanese Labor government: an Australia where health decisions are guided by science, where transparency builds trust and where the systems are strong enough to protect every community—an Australia where the public can rely on and trust the information they receive, safeguarded from misinformation and political opportunism. This legislation brings us closer to that vision. That is why I commend this bill to the House.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Tony Zappia Zappia supports the bill and wants it passed quickly, arguing that a national Centre for Disease Control will better coordinate health expertise, improve pandemic preparednessPlanning, systems and resources put in place before a major disease outbreak spreads widely across countries. and reduce the health and economic damage of future outbreaks.
“I commend the legislation to the House. I hope it is not delayed, because, personally, I'd like to see it kick off on 1 January 2026.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Sam Lim Sam Lim strongly supports the bill and says Australia needs an independent and trusted disease control centre because the COVID response was slow, confusing and undermined by misinformation.
“The establishment of the Australian CDC will ensure that we are prepared and can better protect the health and wellbeing of all Australians. As I mentioned earlier, our hard work did manage to improve vaccination rates during COVID-19. However, I believe that, had we been better prepared from the beginning, our outreach work would have been much easier to deploy. The Australian CDC's functions are expected to expand in the future and will respond to emerging public health risks. As someone who was on the frontline of the COVID-19 response and as someone who every day fought to combat misinformation, I believe establishing the Australian CDC is very important and crucial. I am proud to support this bill and be part of an Albanese Labor government that is delivering on its commitment to a transparent, trusted and independent centre for disease control.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Luke Gosling Luke Gosling supports the bill and says it should pass because it will create an independent national Centre for Disease Control that improves transparency and makes Australia much better prepared for future pandemics after the failures exposed by COVID-19.
“I commend this bill and, in closing, want to acknowledge all those health professionals, aged-care professionals, public health professionals and everyone who did their best during the COVID-19 pandemic. We were unprepared. We did not have a central, national CDC to make us more prepared and to make sure that we would have the best possible response to a national pandemic. As a result, our response was clearly not as good as it could have been. This legislation and a national CDC will go a long way to ensuring that we are much more prepared for the future. That is what the people of Australia deserve.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Carol Brown 2 contributions Brown strongly supports the bill and wants it passed, arguing it is a major long term reform that will create an independent national centre to improve pandemic preparednessPlanning, systems and resources put in place before a major disease outbreak spreads widely across countries., coordination and public trust in health emergencies.
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Carol Brown on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Brown supports the bill and wants it passed because it creates an independent Australian Centre for Disease Control to strengthen pandemic preparednessPlanning, systems and resources put in place before a major disease outbreak spreads widely across countries., public health data and national coordination after the failures exposed by COVID-19. She argues Australia needs a trusted national body that gives evidence-based advice and makes the health system more resilient for future threats.
“I rise to speak in support of the Australian Centre for Disease Control Bill 2025 and the related Australian Centre for Disease Control (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2025. These bills deliver on one of the Albanese Labor government's most important commitments—to establish the independent Australian Centre for Disease Control, CDC. For the first time, Australia will have a dedicated national body bringing together experts, data and public health leadership to prepare for and respond to future health threats. Before Labor came to government, Australia was the only country in the OECD without a centre for disease control. That absence left us exposed when the COVID-19 pandemic struck. The independent COVID-19 response inquiry made clear that we went into that crisis without a playbook, without a single source of authority and without modern systems for collecting and sharing public health information. Australians deserve better than that. We deserve a system that learns from the lessons of the pandemic and builds something stronger and more resilient for the future. That is what these bills deliver.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗Second reading speech
Brown strongly supports the bill and wants it passed, arguing it is a major long term reform that will create an independent national centre to improve pandemic preparednessPlanning, systems and resources put in place before a major disease outbreak spreads widely across countries., coordination and public trust in health emergencies. She says the CDC will strengthen public health systems across Australia, including Tasmania, with sustained funding, transparency and better national response capability.
“The Australian Centre for Disease Control Bill 2025 is one of the most significant health reforms in a generation. It fulfils Labor's commitment to create an independent, transparent, national body to protect the health of all Australians. I commend the bill to the Senate.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗ -
Michelle Ananda-Rajah 2 contributions Ananda-Rajah supports the bill and says Australia needs a national centre for disease control because the country was underprepared for COVID-19 and needs a trusted body to give consistent advice and a practical playbook for the next pandemic.
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Michelle Ananda-Rajah on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Ananda-Rajah supports the bill and says Australia needs a national centre for disease control because the country was underprepared for COVID-19 and needs a trusted body to give consistent advice and a practical playbook for the next pandemic. She backs the bill's staged rollout, arguing that starting with infectious diseasesDiseases that can spread between people, or from animals or the environment to people. will help set the new institution up for success.
“So we do believe, given what we have gone through, that we need to establish an Australian centre for disease control. This CDC will have the capability to lead consistent advice, to be a source of authority and of ground truth, to be responsive and to ensure that we are prepared—that we have resilience back into our system. It is essential that we do that. Its focus initially will be on communicable diseases, which are, of course, infectious diseases—my wheelhouse. And I can tell you all now: the bugs are smarter than us. They always are. They will always be one step ahead of us because they mutate. They mutate fast. Every single one of those pandemics that I listed emerged from the animal kingdom. So, when we talk about one health being enshrined in an Australian CDC, we're referring to the fact that most of these pandemics that have affected humans have emerged from animals, so there's no point corralling human health from animal health. The two are intertwined, and that is what this legislation recognises.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗Second reading speech
Ananda-Rajah supports establishing the Australian Centre for Disease Control and uses the speech to urge the new body to protect healthcare workers, include frontline and disability voices, and respond faster to evolving science. She argues the CDC must apply the precautionary principle and avoid the failures seen during the pandemic, especially around PPE and airborne transmission.
“Thirdly, we need to be open facing. A future CDC needs to be open facing to the public and listen to the workforce and to the science. It's important that a CDC responds to evolving science. In particular, I cite clean air. We spent far too long, right round this country, wiping down surfaces, which would have been fine if we had had a pandemic of gastro, but we didn't. We had a pandemic of a respiratory virus that was travelling through the air, and it was too late before that was adequately (1) recognised and (2) addressed.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗ -
Anne Stanley Anne Stanley supports the bill and wants it passed because it will create an independent Australian Centre for Disease Control to improve public health adviceExpert advice about health risks affecting the community, such as disease outbreaks, emergency planning or ways to reduce harm., data sharing and pandemic preparednessPlanning, systems and resources put in place before a major disease outbreak spreads widely across countries..
“These bills deliver on the Albanese government's 2022 election commitment to deliver a transparent and trusted independent Australian CDC. Our government is committed to ensuring that Australians remain safe and healthy and that our country can be better prepared to face global health risks. I'm very happy to see that the CDC is on our list of agenda items because, being a member of the health committee, I understand just how important that is. I commend the bill to the House.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Sharon Claydon Claydon supports the bill and urges the House to pass it, arguing it will create a transparent, well-governed national disease control body that helps Australia respond better to future outbreaks.
“And, above all, it is people focused. This is about protecting Australian lives, restoring trust and making sure Australians, no matter where they live, can rely on a system that is going to respond swiftly, transparently and effectively when it matters most. This bill is a solemn promise to the Australian people that we will not drift into wilful unpreparedness again and that we will build institutions that are resilient and capable of safeguarding life. In doing so, we honour the lessons from the past, from COVID and outbreaks of influenza to other health shocks. We equip our nation for the future. I commend this bill to the House, and I sincerely urge all members to support it.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Coalition
7 speakers · 9 contributions · 4 oppose · 1 mixed · 2 unclear
Coalition
7 speakers · 9 contributions · 4 oppose · 1 mixed · 2 unclear
-
Ben Small ★ Ben Small says the Coalition will oppose the bill unless there is a full Senate inquiry first, arguing it transfers serious health powers to a new and unclear body without enough scrutiny, transparency or accountability.
“I'm very proud to be part of a Liberal-National opposition that will not be supporting these bills in the House in light of these unresolved concerns and prior to a full Senate inquiry into the bill, which is, frankly, critical to understand how the proposed CDC will operate, how its very serious powers will operate and how it will be accountable to the Australian parliament and the Australian people in the future. The Australian people deserve confidence that their public health institutions are effective, transparent and accountable. So much of what the member for Barton was banging on about in terms of lockdowns and confusion came from state governments. We've got to remember the states made the Commonwealth. There wasn't a single power that was ceded by the Commonwealth to the states in imposing the draconian limitations on very basic freedoms that we experienced across the country, and yet here we are contemplating just ramming through something that will confer those sorts of powers on a new, unknown and untested institution. It just seems to me to be truly bizarre.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Alex Antic Antic opposes the bill and says it would entrench what he sees as the failed and heavy-handed public health bureaucracy of the COVID period without a clear case for why a new agency is needed.
“In conclusion, the establishment of an Australian CDC represents the bricking in of all the mistakes and methodology of the so-called experts throughout the COVID period. The case for its necessity hasn't been adequately made, and the wrongs of the 'expertocracy' during COVID haven't been adequately accounted for; we haven't had a royal commission. We should be culling the bureaucracy at this point, not creating more. For that reason, and for many others, I will be opposing this bill.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Barnaby Joyce Barnaby Joyce does not clearly say whether he will support or oppose the bill, but he is strongly wary of it and wants a Senate inquiry to examine how it affects biosecurity laws and individual rights.
“They are doing it again. That time it was COVID. The next one is the big C—climate change. You're not allowed to ask any questions or you're a denier; you're not a believer. Therefore, we have to accept everything, chapter and verse, that is said, and a lot of it is bunkum and crazy. This time, we're going to spend over a trillion dollars trying to change the climate—from this room, from here! It is nuts! It is completely and utterly off its head! But, if you talk about it, no, you're an evil person; you're contemptuous. On this one, I hope when it goes to a Senate inquiry there is a very hard look at this piece of legislation.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Anne Ruston Ruston says the coalition will not support the bill unless its amendments are accepted, because she argues the proposed CDC has serious flaws on transparency, freedom of information, privacy and oversight.
“For these reasons, the opposition calls on the government to support our amendments to the bill, which are fundamental to the operation of transparency and good governance. The government must put their own rhetoric into action, improve transparency and restore public trust by supporting our amendments or we cannot support this bill.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Sam Birrell Birrell says the coalition is not against the idea of a national disease control centre, but will not support this bill because it is being rushed and transfers major powers without enough scrutiny.
“Public health is critical to the welfare and safety of all Australians. This is a big shift in management of disease control, and it shouldn't be rushed. It should be carefully considered. It should go out for consultation—much like the inquiries we're having at the moment. We need to get all sorts of experts to come in and talk to us about how this might operate in terms of crossover of various responsibilities and powers. So, until the critical questions are answered—again I emphasise that the coalition and I are not opposed to the concept of a centre for disease control. But the way that it's being rushed through the parliament when it expands such important and critical powers—it needs to be examined more, and we need more information before we can agree to passing it as a piece of legislation.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Michael McCormack 3 contributions McCormack says the coalition opposes the bill and wants it examined by a Senate inquiry instead.
Hansard records 3 separate contributions by Michael McCormack on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
McCormack says the coalition opposes the bill and wants it examined by a Senate inquiry instead. He argues the bill gives overly broad powers to withhold information and fails Labor's promises of transparency and accountability.
“Labor has had five years, almost, to make the case for this policy, prior to coming into government and since being in government. They have not successfully done so. We, perhaps for that reason alone, oppose this legislation. We believe it can go to a Senate inquiry. Labor can do what they like. They can. They have a 51 seat majority in this chamber. I understand that. It's numbers. 'We'll get it through this place.' But a Senate inquiry is necessary to delve into precisely what the implications of this particular legislation could involve.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗Second reading speech
McCormack says Australia must be prepared for another pandemic and strongly defends the Morrison government's handling of COVID-19. In this excerpt he does not clearly state whether he supports or opposes the Australian Centre for Disease Control Bill 2025.
“What we have to absolutely do, on both a health front and an economic front, is make sure we are prepared if there is going to be another pandemic. But what we did at that time in the Morrison government was make sure we saved lives and protected lives but also saved jobs and livelihoods. It galls me every time I hear a Labor member getting out their talking points from the Labor dirt unit, saying 'a trillion dollars worth of Liberal Party debt'. It was nowhere near a trillion dollars. The ABC fact check has made that very clear—nowhere near. Every time a Labor member stands and says that, they should then go and apologise for it, because it's not true. It's not right. It's not correct. But what we did do—”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗Second reading speech
McCormack says disease preparedness matters, but argues this bill should not pass now because it is too important to rush and should instead be sent to a Senate inquiry. He opposes the bill in its current form despite backing the policy area.
“So disease preparedness is important, and that's why this legislation is important. And it should be important enough for every Labor member. Mind you, if it were a union piece of legislation, they'd all be in here talking, and they should be talking about disease preparedness. They should be talking about these sorts of things for the sake of their electorates and for the sake of the country, because it's important. Things such as this are important. This legislation should be rejected. It should be going to a Senate inquiry. It's too important not to.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗ -
Terry Young The excerpt does not show Terry Young stating a view on the bill, only procedural votes on amendments, so his position on whether the bill should pass is unclear.
“The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this, the honourable member for Kooyong has moved as an amendment that all words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. The honourable member for Mackellar has moved as an amendment to that amendment that all words after 'House' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. The immediate question is that the amendment moved by the honourable member for Mackellar be agreed to.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Greens
2 speakers · 2 support
Greens
2 speakers · 2 support
-
Jordon Steele-John Steele-John says the Greens will support the bill to establish an Australian Centre for Disease Control because Australia needs a stronger national public health body, while pressing amendments to add chronic disease, disability representation and climate reporting.
“The Australian Greens will be supporting this bill. It is a change whose time has come. I commend it and our amendments to the Senate.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Elizabeth Watson-Brown Watson-Brown says the Greens will support the bill because they have long wanted a well funded national disease control centre, but she argues it should be strengthened with more funding, a broader remit including chronic disease, and stronger transparency and independence.
“The Greens have long been calling for the establishment of a well funded CDC, and we will be supporting this legislation in the House. However, there are some improvements that we believe could be made. We'd like to see the CDC have an increased scope and funding so that it can be well prepared to support our Australian community for chronic diseases.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Minor parties and independents
5 speakers · 4 support · 1 oppose
Minor parties and independents
5 speakers · 4 support · 1 oppose
-
Sophie Scamps ★ Scamps says she supports creating an Australian CDC in principle, but she moves a substitute second reading amendment because she thinks the bill should be changed to include chronic disease prevention from the start and be strengthened on independence, climate and funding.
“That all words after "House" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Monique Ryan ★ Ryan supports creating the Australian Centre for Disease Control and wants the bill to pass, but says it should be strengthened so the agency tackles chronic disease, climate related health risks and prevention from the start.
“It has been more than five years since the world experienced a global pandemic which led Australia's dedicated health workforce to recognise alarming weaknesses in our national public health framework. At last, we are filling the gap with our own centre for disease control. I thank the Minister for Health and Ageing for stewarding the Australian Centre for Disease Control Bill 2025. It's important. I look forward to the creation of an independent statutory centre in the new year. But I also foreshadow several amendments to strengthen the ACDC legislation, to expand its definition of public health matters and to ensure that pandemic preparedness and the health impacts of climate change are priority considerations of the centre from its onset. I also particularly draw the attention of the House to the fact that the minister has announced that the centre will not be funded or staffed or permitted to tackle chronic diseases and preventive health until 2028 at the very earliest and possibly never. This is a grave mistake. When the now prime minister acknowledged in 2020 that Australia was the only OECD nation without a CDC, he committed to one which would address both infectious and chronic diseases, and that commitment has to be honoured in full.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Helen Haines Helen Haines supports the bill and welcomes the creation of an Australian CDC as an important improvement to public health coordination and transparency.
“It's important that Australia has an independent CDC that provides independent, trustworthy advice to the government, key health bodies and the Australian people about our most precious of resources: our health. We must have confidence in the CDC's independence and the review process to ensure this happens. We need to bake this in right now. The establishment of an Australian CDC is an important step forward in our public health architecture, and I truly welcome the establishment of the CDC, but I do so knowing that good-faith amendments are here on the table for the minister to improve the integrity of the statutory review process, because they are very much needed. A robust and transparent CDC will support public health prevention and response well into the future. It's critical that we get this right from the very beginning.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Zali Steggall Steggall supports the bill and wants it to pass, calling a national CDC a long overdue step to strengthen Australia’s public health preparedness after the lessons of COVID-19.
“Ultimately, this bill establishing a CDC is about lessons learned. The pandemic showed us what happens when science, communication and community willpower align. It also showed what happens when we don't—fear, confusion and division. The next crisis might look different, but the principle remains the same. The bill is a step forward towards embedding that preparation in our national framework, and so I commend the bill to the House.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Allegra Spender Spender supports the bill because she says Australia needs an independent national CDC to improve preparedness, coordination and prevention, but she criticises the government for the long delay and for not giving chronic disease prevention a core role from the start.
“So, while I do support this bill, I want to emphasise that passing it is only the first step. What matters now is how quickly and effectively the CDC becomes operational. It must be genuinely independent, with the ability to provide frank advice to government and to the public, and it must have secure long-term funding. To be effective, it needs to attract and retain the best scientific and public health talent, including through partnerships with universities, state health agencies and international bodies, because we don't need another body that sits on the sidelines; we need a CDC that can drive a cultural shift, that focuses on prevention, that can improve data and transparency and that is going to help Australians live longer and healthier lives and also ensure that we can afford health care. After years of promises, the government must now move with urgency to make this happen. Every year of delay means more preventable disease, more pressure on hospitals and more cost to families and taxpayers alike. The COVID pandemic taught us that the cost of being unprepared is measured not only in dollars but in lives and in livelihoods. The Australian people deserve a system that learns these lessons. The Australian Centre for Disease Control can be that system, but only if it is empowered to act boldly and independently and only if the government matches words with actions, including in its remit.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Record
Full record
- Act title
- Australian Centre for Disease Control Act 2025
- Act number
- Act No. 61, 2025
- Became law
- 10 Nov 2025
- Takes effect
- Administered by
- Health, Disability and Ageing
- Final law metadata was collected from the APH progress table and the local source bundle.
- The local final-law text available for this bill contains only a contents fragment, so commencement rows were not available for manual publication.
- Status
- Act -- Collected from the APH bill page.
- Originating house
- House of Representatives
- 03 Sept 2025
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.
- 03 Sept 2025
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.
- 08 Oct 2025
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 09 Oct 2025
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 27 Oct 2025
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 27 Oct 2025
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.
- 27 Oct 2025
House · Consideration in detail debate
Consideration in detail debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 27 Oct 2025
House · Third reading agreed to
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
- 27 Oct 2025
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.
- 27 Oct 2025
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.
- 30 Oct 2025
Senate · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 04 Nov 2025
Senate · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 05 Nov 2025
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.
- 05 Nov 2025
Senate · Committee of the whole: amendments considered
Senate agrees to Greens amendments
The Senate considered the bill in committee of the whole and agreed to six Australian Greens amendments before the bill proceeded to third reading.
- 05 Nov 2025
Senate · Third reading agreed to
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
- 05 Nov 2025
House · Message from Senate reported
Message from Senate reported
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 06 Nov 2025
House · Consideration of Senate message
House agrees to Senate amendments
The House considered the Senate message and agreed to the amendments made by the Senate, allowing the bill to pass both houses in the same form.
- 06 Nov 2025
Parliament · Finally passed both Houses
Passed both houses
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
- 10 Nov 2025
Assent · Assent
Assent
The Governor-General gave Royal Assent, turning the bill into an Act.