This bill became law on Nov 6th, 2025.
Work & employment
Employers that already provide employer-funded paid parental leavePaid parental leave provided by an employer, rather than by the government. The Act protects this leave only where the employer already provides it. generally cannot refuse or cancel that leave just because an employee’s child is stillborn or dies.
The bill was introduced to close a gap between public parental leave protections and employer-funded paid parental leavePaid parental leave provided by an employer, rather than by the government. The Act protects this leave only where the employer already provides it.. Unpaid parental leave and government-funded parental leave already continued after stillbirthA child born without signs of life. The Act uses the existing Fair Work Act definition when applying the new leave protection. or child death, but employer-funded leave depended on workplace terms and could be unclear or withdrawn. Baby Priya’s parents’ experience and advocacy helped turn that gap into a targeted Fair Work Act change.
Before this Act, Australian law already protected unpaid parental leave and government-funded parental leave pay when a child was stillborn or died, but employer-funded paid parental leavePaid parental leave provided by an employer, rather than by the government. The Act protects this leave only where the employer already provides it. could depend on individual workplace terms. Baby Priya’s parents’ experience showed how that gap could leave bereaved parents negotiating with an employer while grieving. The government responded with a narrow Fair Work Act change that protects existing employer-funded paid parental leavePaid parental leave provided by an employer, rather than by the government. The Act protects this leave only where the employer already provides it., while preserving clear negotiated arrangements and not requiring employers to create new paid leave schemes.
The bill’s core aim attracted broad support, but debate centred on two concerns: whether the drafting should expressly exclude intentional pregnancy terminations, and whether the Senate process gave enough room to test impacts on employers. The government and Greens rejected the abortion-related criticism as outside the bill’s purpose, and the Act passed without the proposed exclusions.
Hon Amanda Rishworth MP introduced this bill. It passed on the voices.
Did it become law?
Yes
Became law 06 Nov 2025
Final passage
Passed without a counted vote
Members called out ‘aye’ or ‘no’ — no individual votes were recorded.
Passage speed
28 days
From introduction to the latest recorded parliamentary step
Meaning
Employers that already provide employer-funded paid parental leavePaid parental leave provided by an employer, rather than by the government. The Act protects this leave only where the employer already provides it. generally cannot refuse or cancel that leave just because an employee’s child is stillborn or dies.
The protection covers employer-funded paid parental leavePaid parental leave provided by an employer, rather than by the government. The Act protects this leave only where the employer already provides it. linked to the birth of a child, the birth of a spouse or de facto partner’s child, or the placement of a child for adoption.
The Act does not force businesses to create paid parental leave schemes where they do not already offer employer-funded paid parental leavePaid parental leave provided by an employer, rather than by the government. The Act protects this leave only where the employer already provides it..
Employers can still rely on clear existing employment terms that expressly deal with stillbirthA child born without signs of life. The Act uses the existing Fair Work Act definition when applying the new leave protection. or child death, but cannot avoid the new protection by unilaterally changing those terms after commencementThe date a law starts to operate. This Act commenced on 7 November 2025, the day after Royal Assent..
Unpaid parental leave and ordinary compassionate leave do not count as replacement leave that lets an employer cancel the protected employer-funded paid parental leavePaid parental leave provided by an employer, rather than by the government. The Act protects this leave only where the employer already provides it..
Employees, employee organisations and inspectors can seek civil penalties if an employer wrongly refuses or cancels protected employer-funded paid parental leavePaid parental leave provided by an employer, rather than by the government. The Act protects this leave only where the employer already provides it..
The Bill would amend the Fair Work Act to introduce a new principle that, unless employers and employees have expressly agreed otherwise, employer-funded paid parental leave must not be cancelled because a child is stillborn or dies.Fair Work Amendment (Baby Priya’s) explanatory memorandum
that leave is paid for by the employee’s employer and is associated with: (i) the birth of a child of the employee or the employee’s spouse or de facto partner; or (ii) the placement of a child with the employee for adoption.Fair Work Amendment (Baby Priya’s) Act 2025
The Bill would not require employers to provide employer-funded paid parental leave where they do not already provide such entitlements.Fair Work Amendment (Baby Priya’s) explanatory memorandum
the employer may refuse or cancel that leave if, under the terms and conditions of the employee’s employment... the employer is expressly allowed to refuse or cancel that leave... However, subsection (3) does not apply if the terms and conditions are varied, after the commencement of this section, unilaterally by the employer.Fair Work Amendment (Baby Priya’s) Act 2025
For the purposes of subsection (5), in working out whether the employee is entitled to other leave, disregard: (a) unpaid parental leave... and (b) compassionate leave...Fair Work Amendment (Baby Priya’s) Act 2025
The new table item would provide that an employee, an employee organisation or an inspector, can bring an action for an alleged contravention of the provision in a federal court or eligible state or territory Court.Fair Work Amendment (Baby Priya’s) explanatory memorandum
Context
Before this Act, Australian law already protected unpaid parental leave and government-funded parental leave pay when a child was stillborn or died, but employer-funded paid parental leavePaid parental leave provided by an employer, rather than by the government. The Act protects this leave only where the employer already provides it. could depend on individual workplace terms. Baby Priya’s parents’ experience showed how that gap could leave bereaved parents negotiating with an employer while grieving. The government responded with a narrow Fair Work Act change that protects existing employer-funded paid parental leavePaid parental leave provided by an employer, rather than by the government. The Act protects this leave only where the employer already provides it., while preserving clear negotiated arrangements and not requiring employers to create new paid leave schemes.
Employer-funded leave gap remained
Unpaid parental leave and government-funded parental leave pay already continued after stillbirthA child born without signs of life. The Act uses the existing Fair Work Act definition when applying the new leave protection. or child death, but employer-funded paid parental leavePaid parental leave provided by an employer, rather than by the government. The Act protects this leave only where the employer already provides it. was not subject to the same clear rule.
Fair Work Amendment (Baby Priya’s) explanatory memorandum ↗Baby Priya’s parents face leave uncertainty
Parliamentary speeches said Baby Priya died after 42 days and that her mother then faced uncertainty or withdrawal of employer-funded paid parental leavePaid parental leave provided by an employer, rather than by the government. The Act protects this leave only where the employer already provides it., prompting her family’s advocacy.
House of Representatives Hansard, 29 October 2025 ↗Government commits to protect bereaved parents
The explanatory memorandum described the bill as implementing an election commitment to stop employers cancelling employer-funded paid parental leavePaid parental leave provided by an employer, rather than by the government. The Act protects this leave only where the employer already provides it. if an employee’s child is stillborn or dies.
Fair Work Amendment (Baby Priya’s) explanatory memorandum ↗Bill introduced to Parliament
Amanda Rishworth introduced the bill in the House of Representatives, saying it would give parents certainty and time to grieve after stillbirthA child born without signs of life. The Act uses the existing Fair Work Act definition when applying the new leave protection. or child death.
Minister’s second reading speech ↗Parliament passes bill unchanged
The Senate passed the bill on the same day it was introduced there, and the final Act text matched the introduced bill after normalisation.
Parliamentary timeline and bill text comparison ↗Employer-funded leave protection starts
The Act commenced the day after Royal Assent, so the new protection applies to stillbirths or child deaths occurring on or after commencementThe date a law starts to operate. This Act commenced on 7 November 2025, the day after Royal Assent. where the other legal conditions are met.
Fair Work Amendment (Baby Priya’s) Act 2025 ↗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
Members debated the bill’s purpose, including support for protecting bereaved parents and concerns raised by some members about how the stillbirthA child born without signs of life. The Act uses the existing Fair Work Act definition when applying the new leave protection. definition might operate.
The House sent the bill to the Federation Chamber for further second-reading debate. For this bill, the Federation Chamber reported back later the same day and the House then completed its remaining formal steps that day.
Referred to Federation Chamber
Members debated the bill’s purpose, including support for protecting bereaved parents and concerns raised by some members about how the stillbirthA child born without signs of life. The Act uses the existing Fair Work Act definition when applying the new leave protection. definition might operate.
Second reading debate
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step. The official House record shows the referral out and return both happened on the same day, before the House moved to its final formal votes.
Reported from Federation Chamber
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Third reading agreed to
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
Members debated the bill’s purpose, including support for protecting bereaved parents and concerns raised by some members about how the stillbirthA child born without signs of life. The Act uses the existing Fair Work Act definition when applying the new leave protection. definition might operate.
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
Senators considered the bill in detail after second reading. Three committee-stage amendment sheets had been circulated, but the final Act matched the introduced bill text.
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Third reading agreed to
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Finally passed both Houses
The Governor-General gave Royal Assent, turning the bill into an Act.
Key criticism
The bill’s core aim attracted broad support, but debate centred on two concerns: whether the drafting should expressly exclude intentional pregnancy terminations, and whether the Senate process gave enough room to test impacts on employers. The government and Greens rejected the abortion-related criticism as outside the bill’s purpose, and the Act passed without the proposed exclusions.
Most criticism was conditional or about drafting and process; the collected debate shows broad support for protecting bereaved parents from losing existing employer-funded paid parental leavePaid parental leave provided by an employer, rather than by the government. The Act protects this leave only where the employer already provides it..
Intentional termination exclusions
Some Coalition and One Nation speakers argued the bill should clearly exclude cases where a stillbirthA child born without signs of life. The Act uses the existing Fair Work Act definition when applying the new leave protection. or child death followed an intentional pregnancy termination, and Senate amendment sheets proposed that exclusion.
Employer cost and process concerns
Susan McDonald said the bill was being guillotined before employer groups could be properly heard, and argued that the measure shifted another social cost onto small businesses already under pressure.
Further sources
Votes
The bill passed both chambers on the voices, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes for final passage.
House agreed to the bill's third reading on the voices, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes for final passage in that chamber.
Passed on the voices
In a voice vote, members call out Aye or No and the presiding officer judges which side has it. Individual names are only recorded if a formal division is called.
Senate agreed to the bill's third reading on the voices, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes for final passage in that chamber.
Passed on the voices
In a voice vote, members call out Aye or No and the presiding officer judges which side has it. Individual names are only recorded if a formal division is called.
Parliamentary debate
Start here — lead voices
Rishworth supports the bill and wants it passed because it will stop employer funded paid parental leave being cancelled when a child is stillborn or dies, giving grieving parents clarity and financial certainty.
Read in Hansard ↗McDonald opposes the bill, saying that while she sympathises with bereaved families, the measure unfairly shifts extra leave costs onto small businesses and has been rushed through without proper scrutiny or input from employer groups.
Read in Hansard ↗Payman supports the bill and says it should pass because it compassionately stops employers from cancelling approved paid parental leave after a stillbirthA child born without signs of life. The Act uses the existing Fair Work Act definition when applying the new leave protection. or early infant death.
Read in Hansard ↗David Pocock supports the bill and wants it passed because it protects bereaved parents from losing employer funded paid parental leave after a stillbirthA child born without signs of life. The Act uses the existing Fair Work Act definition when applying the new leave protection. or the death of a baby.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
13 speakers · 14 contributions · 13 support
“I rise to speak in support of the Fair Work Amendment (Baby Priya's) Bill 2025, a bill that reminds us that the law is not only about contracts and clauses but about compassion and conscience—about people; about Baby Priya and her family and families right across Australia. This legislation ensures that parents who endure the unthinkable, the death of their child, are not asked to return to work while they are still shattered by grief. It closes a cruel gap in our workplace laws and places humanity at the centre of our fair work system, a fundamental principle of the Albanese Labor government.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“To Priya's mum and dad: thank you again for your courage. You have turned heartbreak into hope and you have helped build a fairer system for thousands of families. And to Baby Priya: your name will now forever be part of our nation's laws—a legacy of love and compassion that will outlast us all. This is what Labor governments do. We fix what's unfair, we stand for working people and we deliver reforms that make life fairer and futures more secure. I commend the bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“There hasn't been that legal protection, up until now, to stop employers from cancelling PPL. For parents like Baby Priya's and for every family who has lost a child in that unthinkable way and had that experience, this is going to be a lasting legacy. Baby Priya's parents have been so instrumental in ensuring that occurs. It's a promise that no-one is going to face this pain alone and that they're not going to be forced back to work while they're still trying to survive the deepest loss imaginable. It honours the strength of Baby Priya's parents, whose real courage actually made this possible. It is going to make our workplaces fairer and more compassionate. For that, I commend this bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This parliament often debates numbers and concepts and percentages, but every now and then we pass a law that speaks directly to our humanity, and this is one of those laws. With the passage of this bill, I say to every parent: if the unthinkable happens, you will have certainty, you will have time, and you will have the compassion of this parliament. Through this bill, baby Priya's name will live on not as a story of loss but as a story of love, of courage and of change. That's something that every member of this house should be proud to support.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Katy Gallagher on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Gallagher says the government supports the bill and wants the Senate to pass it because it will protect paid parental leave for parents whose baby is stillborn or dies, giving grieving families certainty, time and dignity. She rejects unrelated objections and says the government will not support Senator Roberts's amendments.
“The Fair Work Amendment (Baby Priya's) Bill 2025 ensures that our workplace laws meet a simple standard—that we do care for one another in our darkest moments, that we look after each other and that, where gaps are identified, they can be addressed through legislation, and that that flows on and benefits families into the future. That is something the Senate should support. On behalf of the government and on behalf of Baby Priya's family, who, of course, are the motivation—the moving force—behind this bill, I commend the bill to the Senate.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Gallagher supports the bill and wants it passed because it will stop employer funded paid parental leave being cancelled after a stillbirthA child born without signs of life. The Act uses the existing Fair Work Act definition when applying the new leave protection. or the death of a child, giving grieving parents certainty at a devastating time. She says the reform fills a gap in the law while preserving any separate arrangements employers and employees have already agreed.
“This Bill introduces a new principle into the Fair Work Act. Unless employers and employees have expressly agreed otherwise, employer funded paid parental leave must not be cancelled because a child is stillborn or dies.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“I am deeply proud to stand in support of this bill as a friend of someone who has experienced the most traumatic of losses and as a representative of the women in my community who have felt and experienced that too. This is why we must pass this bill with the utmost urgency and importance. I acknowledge the contribution of every senator who has come and spoken in support of this bill with sensitivity and with care and with compassion. I commend the bill to the Senate.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Back to this bill—in the situation of a stillbirth or an infant death, we want families to have certainty. We want employers to have certainty as well. This bill will provide that kind of clarity by preventing the unilateral cancellation of paid parental leave. And it builds upon the other supports that this Labor government has introduced for working parents, principally the expansion of paid parental leave, which currently sits at 24 weeks and will go up to 26 weeks next year, and the numerous reforms we are making to early education and care to better support working families.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The bill introduces a new principle into the Fair Work Act. Unless employers and employees have expressly agreed otherwise, employer funded paid parental leave must not be cancelled because a child is stillborn or dies.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I urge those opposite to support the passing of this bill, because it is the right thing to do.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I urge all senators across the chamber to consider the human cost of failing to act. To hesitate would be to send a message to grieving parents that their suffering is a matter for uncertainty and negotiation, rather than protection, compassion and respect. This bill ensures that no parent must question whether they can access leave they're entitled to during one of life's most tragic circumstances. I fully support this legislation.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This reform is vital. It protects employer funded paid parental leave entitlements at one of the most difficult times a parent can face. Again I thank Baby Priya's mum, dad and grandparents for their fierce advocacy to ensure that no parent ever goes through what they did.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This reform builds on Labor's record of strengthening support for working parents. It sits alongside our government funded paid parental leave, with the adding of superannuation contributions. We know that paid parental leave gives parents the support that they need to navigate the challenges ahead, and that support should not be taken away when parents face the most unimaginable of circumstances. This is a measured and compassionate reform that might cost little but means everything to the families that are affected. It brings decency to our workplace laws. It honours not only Baby Priya but every family who has faced this unimaginable loss. In this place today, we have the opportunity to act with compassion by passing this bill, and I urge all of us to do so.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise to speak in support of the Fair Work Amendment (Baby Priya's) Bill 2025. This bill makes a small but deeply meaningful change to our workplace relations framework. It ensures that, when the unthinkable happens—when a parent loses a baby through stillbirth or early infant death—their right to employer funded paid parental leave cannot be cancelled simply because of that tragedy. This bill is about compassion. It responds to the experiences of Baby Priya's parents, who, after the loss of their daughter at six weeks old, were told that their employer funded parental leave would be withdrawn. No parent should ever face the stress of negotiating their leave entitlements while grieving their child. I'd like to place on record my thanks to Baby Priya's parents for their advocacy in this area.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
6 speakers · 2 support · 1 oppose · 3 mixed
“I rise today to respectfully support this bill, the Fair Work Amendment (Baby Priya's) Bill 2025, and to honour the coalition's commitment to bipartisan support on matters of compassion and family welfare. The coalition gave bipartisan support to this bill, and, as I said, that support still remains. However, in relation to the guillotine that's just been put in place by the vote of this chamber, I'd like to make a couple of comments before I make a contribution on the bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The point that I seek to make is that guillotining this legislation is bad for Australia. It's bad for our democracy. It's bad for the standing that this parliament has in the minds of those people that we come here seeking to represent. It is bad for a sector of our community and our economy because, as we seek to make good a harm, we have not had any ability to look at what that price is. I don't think that's fair. I think it really diminishes the government in my eyes, but, worse, I come here to represent people who provide jobs to thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions of Australians, and their voice has been completely lost and disregarded in this. I don't think that's right.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Apologies to the chamber, but I can't avoid making this statement. Not everyone understands, but I need to clarify that abortions that are undertaken in the third trimester effectively require a stillbirth to take place. You can, as I have, speak to medical experts and become aware of that. Quite obviously the definition is that a payment is made in the event of a stillbirth. And, if a birth has to take place in the third trimester, then, of course, the payment is made. What our nation needs—and I'm not proposing to do it via this bill, because, as I said, I support the substantive elements of this bill, not the unintended consequence—is a definition of what 'stillborn' means, and stillborn must exclude the intentional decision to undertake an abortion. If that were the case, I wouldn't be speaking. The bill would have my support, because the Fair Work Act would simply be saying, 'In the event of a stillbirth, as defined, excluding late-term abortion,' then, of course, an employer can't seek to renegotiate leave for a family dealing with that grief. As I have said, we need to ensure that we're very clear about this. I would prefer a world in which those Commonwealth payments aren't made either, and that definition of stillborn would deal with that as well.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We understand there are so many complexities, but I stand on the position that the day after a child is born, no matter what medical conditions or impairments that may be there, you have no right to interfere in their life. Therefore, the day before we believe it is the same. That is something I have lived by, and I think it is incredibly important for me to state my position on this. There must be a clarification on this issue. It must be clarified before we come to a vote. It must be from the minister before the bill is voted for and, either way, there must be honesty in exactly what the position is. I think we have the right to know where we vote and how we vote. On one instance, there is 100 per cent support, 100 per cent empathy, we completely understand—no questions about it. But on the extension of it, if that is where it goes, we have every right not to vote for it and we have every right to be informed of it. We have every right for people to be completely clear about this and exactly where it is.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This is a bill that should have support from all corners of Australian society, and if we can achieve that clarity, I think we will get there. I want to associate myself with the remarks of the member for Canning, the member for New England and the member for Barker, who have all outlined this issue, and with everyone who has spoken in favour of this bill, because I can appreciate the intention here. I can appreciate the passion people have brought to this issue and I strongly support the intention. I thank the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“But I do have a question about the unintended consequences of this bill, and it applies to late-term abortions. This is a place where we can come and express views according to conscience. It's no secret that I am opposed to late-term abortions. So the point of my speaking this morning is to affirm the intent of this bill, which is to give certainty for families suffering through the loss of a child, and I absolutely support the intent of that. I think it's a noble and good thing, and Baby Priya's bill deserves our support for that reason. But I do call upon the government—I note the sensitivity around this—to clarify that it does not apply to late-term abortions. That is the question at the heart of my speech. That is all I have to say on this matter.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
3 speakers · 3 support
“The Greens support this bill as it's a step towards a more caring, equitable industrial relations system—a system that protects workers in crisis and affirms the essential link between work, care and community. We will continue to push for broader reform, including for 52 weeks of paid parental leave, stronger protection for carers for their jobs, and fairer rights for all workers balancing paid work and unpaid care. This is a legacy that will touch countless lives. I'll conclude with some words directly from Priya's mum:”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The Greens support the Fair Work Amendment (Baby Priya's) Bill. It's a relatively small change that will make a big difference to families experiencing the grief of stillbirth or the loss of a baby. Stillbirth, miscarriage and infertility are issues that affect so many families. According to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare's data, six babies are stillborn each day and two die within 28 days of birth. Sadly, these are issues which are still not talked about enough. That silence can compound the grief, trauma and isolation experienced by families. The Pink Elephants Support Network's recent report, Not just aloss, found that 75 per cent of women coping with stillbirth and miscarriage feel unsupported and abandoned, particularly in rural and regional areas without specialist support services.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The Greens support the Fair Work Amendment (Baby Priya's) Bill, which is the result of a tireless advocacy campaign by Baby Priya's family and the Australian Services Union. We know that this bill, which extends paid parental leave to parents who have had a tragic stillbirth or lost an infant within the leave period, will make a huge difference for families who have suffered unimaginable losses. To go through this loss and then to be expected to immediately return to work is unfair, it is unjust, and it is unnecessary. This is an important step forward in doing our bit to support families and parents who are suffering tragic losses.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
1 speaker · 1 mixed
“Why has One Nation submitted an amendment to the Baby Priya bill? Why have I submitted an amendment to the Baby Priya bill? The bill requires employers to provide paid parental leave to employees who have a stillborn baby, or where the baby dies during the parental leave period. One Nation do not oppose this measure in principle; we support it. Our amendment does not change the outcome of the bill for most women, including the situation Baby Priya's parents, very sadly, found themselves to be in.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
1 speaker · 1 support
“This is a very good bill. Again, I want to thank and recognise Priya's parents for their work in pushing for it, and I want to commend Minister Rishworth and the government for bringing this bill to the parliament. I also want to thank those among my colleagues who have debated this bill with empathy and respect. Embedding compassion into our workplaces is something we should be striving for in Australia.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
1 speaker · 1 support
“I rise to speak in support of the Fair Work Amendment (Baby Priya's) Bill 2025, a bill that I believe is grounded in compassion and common sense. This is a good bill, but I believe it does not go far enough. It is a compassionate and practical reform that corrects a cruel inconsistency in our laws. It ensures that when a baby is stillborn or dies soon after birth an employer cannot unilaterally cancel paid parental leave that has already been approved. It brings basic decency into line with existing protections for unpaid parental leave. But this bill is only a very small step in addressing a far bigger problem. Australia's workplace laws still fail to properly recognise and support the reproductive health needs of women. As the Australian Council of Trade Unions has pointed out, reproductive health is not a niche concern; it's a universal one. ACTU president Michele O'Neil has said:”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Record
House · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
House · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
Members debated the bill’s purpose, including support for protecting bereaved parents and concerns raised by some members about how the stillbirthA child born without signs of life. The Act uses the existing Fair Work Act definition when applying the new leave protection. definition might operate.
House · Referred to Federation Chamber
Referred to Federation Chamber
The House sent the bill to the Federation Chamber for further second-reading debate.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
Members debated the bill’s purpose, including support for protecting bereaved parents and concerns raised by some members about how the stillbirthA child born without signs of life. The Act uses the existing Fair Work Act definition when applying the new leave protection. definition might operate.
House · Second reading agreed to
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
House · Reported from Federation Chamber
Reported from Federation Chamber
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Third reading agreed to
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Senate · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Senate · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
Members debated the bill’s purpose, including support for protecting bereaved parents and concerns raised by some members about how the stillbirthA child born without signs of life. The Act uses the existing Fair Work Act definition when applying the new leave protection. definition might operate.
Senate · Second reading agreed to
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Senate · Committee of the Whole debate
Committee of the Whole debate
Senators considered the bill in detail after second reading. Three committee-stage amendment sheets had been circulated, but the final Act matched the introduced bill text.
Senate · Third reading agreed to
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Parliament · Finally passed both Houses
Passed both houses
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Assent · Assent
Assent
The Governor-General gave Royal Assent, turning the bill into an Act.
