Sponsor speech Supports
Julian Leeser
Julian Leeser supports the bill and frames it as an urgent, non-partisan response to child sexual abuse and the need to bring perpetrators to justice.
Read in Hansard ↗Crimes Amendment (Mandatory Minimum Sentences for Child Sexual Abuse)
Current status
This bill is currently before Parliament.
Policy area
Law, justice & rights
What does this bill do?
The bill would amend the Crimes Act 1914A federal criminal law statute. This bill would amend its sentencing and release-order provisions. to add more Commonwealth child sex offences to the mandatory minimumA minimum prison term that a court must impose for a particular offence, unless the law provides an exception. sentencing table.
Why was it introduced?
Julian Leeser introduced the bill as a private member's bill to strengthen punishment and release rules for Commonwealth child sex offences. The collected debate frames the bill as a response to rising reports of online child sexual exploitation, the Maloney case cited by Andrew Wallace, and concern that some offenders can be released on recognisance orders after serving only a small part of their sentence.
Broader context
The bill sits in a longer federal debate about child sexual abuse, online harms and mandatory sentencing. The collected sources show earlier controversy over mandatory minimums for child sex offences, later online-safety and childcare-safety reforms, and a 2025 House debate where supporters tied this bill to rising online exploitation reports and a sentence they said showed a release-order gap.
Key criticism
The collected 2025 bill record contains support speeches and does not include a detailed argument against this bill. The main caution from the scoped sources is contextual: mandatory minimumA minimum prison term that a court must impose for a particular offence, unless the law provides an exception. sentencing for child sex offences had been contested in an earlier Parliament, when Labor and the Greens voted to remove mandatory sentences from a previous government bill before Labor changed position.
Who supported it?
Julian Leeser MP introduced this bill. Supportive speeches so far have come from Liberal Party, LNP.
Introduced in House 27 Oct 2025
At second reading in House 27 Oct 2025
Not yet reached Senate —
Not yet law —
Did it become law?
Not yet
Final passage
No final vote yet
The bill has not yet completed passage through Parliament.
Days since introduction
226 days
Updated 10 June 2026.
Meaning
What does this bill do?
-
The bill would amend the Crimes Act 1914A federal criminal law statute. This bill would amend its sentencing and release-order provisions. to add more Commonwealth child sex offences to the mandatory minimumA minimum prison term that a court must impose for a particular offence, unless the law provides an exception. sentencing table.
-
It would set a five-year mandatory minimum sentenceA minimum prison term that a court must impose for a particular offence, unless the law provides an exception. for listed Criminal CodeThe main federal criminal code. The bill refers to specific Criminal Code offences involving postal services, carriage services and child abuse material. offences involving child abuse materialMaterial that depicts or involves child sexual abuse. The bill deals with sentencing rules for existing offences involving this material. sent, possessed, controlled, produced, supplied or obtained through postal or carriage services.
-
For other listed Commonwealth child sex offences already covered by the mandatory minimumA minimum prison term that a court must impose for a particular offence, unless the law provides an exception. regime, the bill would raise the minimum term from four years to six years.
-
The bill would stop courts making a recognizance release orderA court order that can release a person on conditions, often described in debate as release on good behaviour. The bill would restrict its use for Commonwealth child sex offence sentences. for a Commonwealth child sex offenceA federal child sex offence covered by Commonwealth law. This bill uses that category for rules about mandatory minimum sentences and recognizance release orders. sentence unless the court is satisfied there are exceptional circumstances.
-
Supporters presented the bill as a sentencing and release-order measure, not as a bill creating new criminal offences.
-
If passed, the whole Act would start the day after Royal AssentThe formal approval that turns a passed bill into an Act. This bill had not received Royal Assent in the collected APH record..
Show source excerpts
-
Schedule 1—Amendments Crimes Act 1914 1 Section 16AAA (after table item 9) Insert:
Crimes Amendment (Mandatory Minimum Sentences for Child Sexual Abuse) introduced bill text -
offence against subsection 471.19(1) of the Criminal Code 5 years ... offence against subsection 474.23(1) of the Criminal Code 5 years
Crimes Amendment (Mandatory Minimum Sentences for Child Sexual Abuse) introduced bill text -
Subsection 16AAB(2) (table items 11, 12 and 13, column 2) Omit “4 years”, substitute “6 years”. ... Subsection 16AAB(2) (table items 24, 24A and 25, column 2) Omit “4 years”, substitute “6 years”.
Crimes Amendment (Mandatory Minimum Sentences for Child Sexual Abuse) introduced bill text -
A court must not make a recognizance release order in respect of a sentence for a Commonwealth child sex offence unless the court is satisfied that exceptional circumstances justify the making of the order.
Crimes Amendment (Mandatory Minimum Sentences for Child Sexual Abuse) introduced bill text -
This bill is not complicated. It does not create new offences; it simply ensures that when a person commits one of the most heinous crimes imaginable the sentence they receive reflects the gravity of their crime.
Second reading speech -
The whole of this Act The day after this Act receives the Royal Assent.
Crimes Amendment (Mandatory Minimum Sentences for Child Sexual Abuse) introduced bill text
Context
Broader context for this bill
The bill sits in a longer federal debate about child sexual abuse, online harms and mandatory sentencing. The collected sources show earlier controversy over mandatory minimums for child sex offences, later online-safety and childcare-safety reforms, and a 2025 House debate where supporters tied this bill to rising online exploitation reports and a sentence they said showed a release-order gap.
- 15 Dec 2017
Royal commission urges stronger child-abuse reporting
The child sexual abuse royal commission made 189 recommendations, including a central recommendation for adults to report known or suspected child abuse.
Australian Financial Review ↗ - 16 June 2020
Mandatory sentencing for child sex offences becomes a flashpoint
Labor changed position after Labor and the Greens voted in the Senate to remove mandatory sentences from an earlier child sex offences bill.
Australian Financial Review ↗ - 21 Dec 2021
Online Safety Act powers target child exploitation material
New Online Safety Act powers were designed to let the eSafety Commissioner seek removal of seriously harmful and illegal content, including child sexual exploitation material hosted overseas.
Department of Infrastructure ↗ - 02 July 2025
Childcare charges trigger Victorian safety review
Victoria launched an urgent childcare safety review after a worker was charged with more than 70 sex offences against babies and toddlers.
Australian Financial Review ↗ - 22 Aug 2025
Education ministers agree childcare safety package
Education ministers agreed to a $189 million package including CCTV, a mobile phone ban, a national worker register, tougher oversight and improved child sexual abuse prevention training.
Australian Financial Review ↗ - 27 Oct 2025
Supporters cite Maloney sentence and AFP reports
In the House, Andrew Wallace said AFP online child sexual exploitation reports had risen by 41 per cent in 2024-25 and cited the Maloney case as showing why recognisance release orders should be restricted.
House Hansard ↗
Legislative route
How did it move through Parliament?
House Senate
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 readingThe parliamentary stage where the House or Senate debates the broad purpose and principles of a bill. opened 27 Oct 2025
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second readingThe parliamentary stage where the House or Senate debates the broad purpose and principles of a bill., opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second readingThe parliamentary stage where the House or Senate debates the broad purpose and principles of a bill. moved
Key criticism
The main case against this bill
The collected 2025 bill record contains support speeches and does not include a detailed argument against this bill. The main caution from the scoped sources is contextual: mandatory minimumA minimum prison term that a court must impose for a particular offence, unless the law provides an exception. sentencing for child sex offences had been contested in an earlier Parliament, when Labor and the Greens voted to remove mandatory sentences from a previous government bill before Labor changed position.
This does not prove the bill faced no criticism; it means no substantive criticism of this bill was present in the supplied local source bundle.
Further sources
Votes
Recorded votes
No recorded votes have been found yet for this bill.
Parliamentary debate
Who spoke, and what they said
Start here — lead voices
Lead voice Supports
Andrew Wallace
Andrew Wallace supports the bill, arguing that it would strengthen sentencing for Commonwealth child sex offences, respond to the Maloney case, and limit release on recognisance orders unless exceptional circumstances exist.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
Coalition
2 speakers · 2 support
Coalition
2 speakers · 2 support
-
Andrew Wallace ★ Andrew Wallace supports the bill, arguing that it would strengthen sentencing for Commonwealth child sex offences, respond to the Maloney case, and limit release on recognisance orders unless exceptional circumstances exist.
“Importantly, this bill closes a loophole exposed by the Maloney case. It provides that a recognisance release order, which is effectively a release on good behaviour, cannot be made for Commonwealth child sex offences unless there are exceptional circumstances.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Julian Leeser ★ Julian Leeser supports the bill and frames it as an urgent, non-partisan response to child sexual abuse and the need to bring perpetrators to justice.
“There can be few more important or urgent matters for parliament to deal with than the prevention of child sexual abuse and the bringing of perpetrators to justice, as is outlined in this bill.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Record
Full record
- Status
- Before Reps -- Collected from the APH bill page.
- Originating house
- House of Representatives
- 27 Oct 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.
- 27 Oct 2025
House · Second reading moved
Second readingThe parliamentary stage where the House or Senate debates the broad purpose and principles of a bill. opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second readingThe parliamentary stage where the House or Senate debates the broad purpose and principles of a bill., opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.