This bill became law on Sep 18th, 2026.
Culture, sport & community
Future major international sporting events can be added to the protection scheme through rules made by the minister.
The government said requiring a separate Act of Parliament for every event was too slow and repetitive, and that rules would let protections be put in place more quickly. It argued that stopping businesses from falsely presenting themselves as sponsors protects genuine sponsorship, encourages private investment and may reduce pressure for government funding. Minister Anika Wells said the government had provided more than $189 million for major sporting events since 2022 and committed to support more than 15 events over the previous four years. The government intends to use the new system for upcoming events including the Brisbane 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games, and says the bill itself has no financial impact.
Since 2014, Australia has protected the names and images of major sporting events against unauthorised commercial use, including businesses falsely implying they are official sponsors, but each new event had to be added through another Act of Parliament. The government said repeated legislation was too slow, so Hon Anika Wells MP introduced this bill to let internationally significant events be protected by disallowable rules, with the new system intended for Brisbane 2032 after Parliament passed it in September 2026.
Sarah Henderson (Liberal) argued that the existing system already worked and that major events are known years ahead, leaving enough time for Parliament to consider them. She said the bill shifts decisions from Parliament to the minister, reducing debate, transparency and scrutiny, even though the government had not shown a legislative backlog or urgent problem. She also said the change had been initiated by the minister rather than sporting organisations or other stakeholders.
Hon Anika Wells MP introduced this bill. It passed with support from Labor, Greens, Jacqui Lambie Network, some crossbench members; opposed by Liberal, Nationals, Australia's Voice, Liberal Party, UAP.
Did it become law?
Yes
Became law 18 Sept 2026
Final passage
Recorded final vote
1 counted final-passage vote was recorded.
Passage speed
85 days
From introduction to the latest recorded parliamentary step
Meaning
Future major international sporting events can be added to the protection scheme through rules made by the minister. Previously, Parliament had to amend the Act for each event.
Before adding an event, the minister must be satisfied that it is internationally significant, or connected to an internationally significant sporting movement, and that protecting it fits the Act's purposes.
For each protected event, the rules must identify the responsible organisation, the event organisations, the protected names and symbols, and the protection periodThe time when an event's legal protections apply.. That period cannot be longer than the minister reasonably considers necessary for the Act's purposes.
Protected names and images will generally be treated as connected with every listed organisation for an event. The rules can exclude particular names, images, classes or circumstances from that connection.
The underlying restrictions remain focused on unauthorised commercial use, such as marketing that falsely suggests a business sponsors an event. Existing exceptions for news reporting, criticism, review and providing information are unchanged.
The bill clarifies that unauthorised commercial use of protected event names and images can count as advertising under the Act.
Schedules 1 and 2, which relate to past events, are removed. Future events and their associated details will instead be put in the rules.
1 Section 4 (paragraph beginning “This Act”) Omit “identified in the Schedules to this Act”, substitute “prescribed by the rules”. 2 Section 4 (paragraph beginning “A person”) Omit “or specified in the Schedule to this Act that covers the event”. 3 Section 8 (paragraph beginning “Many”) Repeal the paragraph. 4 Subsection 9(1) 5 Subsection 9(1) (definition of authorising body) Omit “specified as the authorising body in the Schedule to this Act that covers the event”, substitute “prescribed by the rules as the authorising body for the event”. 6 Subsection 9(1) (definition of event body)Major Sporting Events (Indicia and Images) Protection Amendment as-passed text
14A Simplified outline of this Part The rules may prescribe an event as a major sporting event. The Minister must be satisfied of certain matters before rules are made to prescribe an event as a major sporting event under this Part. 14B Major sporting events The rules may prescribe an event as a major sporting event. 14C Requirements before prescribing an event as a major sporting event (1) An event may only be prescribed as a major sporting event under section 14B if the Minister is satisfied that: (a) the event is of international significance or relates to a sporting movement of inteMajor Sporting Events (Indicia and Images) Protection Amendment as-passed text
14D Authorising body, event bodies etc. for a major sporting event (1) For each event prescribed as a major sporting event under section 14B, the rules must prescribe the following: (a) the authorising body for the event; (b) the event bodies for the event; (c) the protected indicia for the event; (d) the protection period for the event. (2) For the purposes of paragraph (1)(d), the protection period must not exceed a period which the Minister reasonably considers to be necessary, having regard to the objects of the Act.Major Sporting Events (Indicia and Images) Protection Amendment as-passed text
12 After section 11 11A When protected indicia or images relate to an event body for a major sporting event (1) Protected indicia or images for a major sporting event relate to each event body for the event. (2) However, the rules may prescribe: (a) that protected indicia and images, or protected indicia or images included in a class of protected indicia or images, do not relate to an event body for a major sporting event; or (b) the circumstances in which protected indicia or images do not relate to an event body for a major sporting event.Major Sporting Events (Indicia and Images) Protection Amendment as-passed text
The Act engages the right to freedom of expression in Article 19 of the ICCPR, as it restricts the unauthorised commercial use of protected indicia and images in certain circumstances. Under the framework established by the Bill, specific indicia will be prescribed by rules made under the Act for particular major sporting events. The application of these protections may limit the ability of persons to use those indicia and images in commercial communications. The right to freedom of expression is not absolute and may be subject to limitations where they are reasonable, necessary and proportiMajor Sporting Events (Indicia and Images) Protection Amendment explanatory memorandum
14 Section 15 (paragraph beginning “A person”) Omit “or specified in the Schedule to this Act that covers the event”, substitute “in relation to the event”. 15 Subsection 16(2) (note) Omit “the Schedule to this Act that covers the event”, substitute “section 11A”. 16 Subsection 16(4) (note 1) Omit “the Schedule to this Act that covers the event”, substitute “section 11A”. 17 Subsection 16(5) Omit all the words after “or Territory”, substitute “that is prescribed by the rules in relation to the event”. 18 Paragraph 19(1)(a) Omit “the Schedule to this Act that covers the event specifiesMajor Sporting Events (Indicia and Images) Protection Amendment as-passed text
23 Schedules 1 and 2 Repeal the Schedules.Major Sporting Events (Indicia and Images) Protection Amendment as-passed text
Context
Since 2014, Australia has protected the names and images of major sporting events against unauthorised commercial use, including businesses falsely implying they are official sponsors, but each new event had to be added through another Act of Parliament. The government said repeated legislation was too slow, so Hon Anika Wells MP introduced this bill to let internationally significant events be protected by disallowable rules, with the new system intended for Brisbane 2032 after Parliament passed it in September 2026.
The 2014 Act establishes event protection
Australia’s scheme began protecting major sporting event names and images against unauthorised commercial use, including ambush marketingMarketing that falsely suggests an official event connection..
Major Sporting Events (Indicia and Images) Protection Amendment explanatory memorandum ↗Hon Anika Wells MP introduces the amendment bill
Hon Anika Wells MP introduced the bill in the House of Representatives to replace event-by-event primary legislation with a rules-based system.
Parliamentary timeline ↗House passes the bill
The House completed its consideration of the bill, sending the proposed rules-based model to the Senate.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Parliament passes the bill
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing the legislative change needed to prescribe future events through rules.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Brisbane 2032 is intended to use the new system
The explanatory memorandum says rules are intended to be developed for the Brisbane 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games without another amendment Act.
Major Sporting Events (Indicia and Images) Protection Amendment explanatory memorandum ↗Legislative route
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Referred to Federation Chamber
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
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.
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
Considered by scrutiny committee (01/07/2026): Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills; Scrutiny Digest 8 of 2026
Scrutiny Digest 8 of 2026
APH bill page notesThe bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Recorded vote: 31 to 18.
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
Recorded vote: 31 to 18.
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
Sarah Henderson (Liberal) argued that the existing system already worked and that major events are known years ahead, leaving enough time for Parliament to consider them. She said the bill shifts decisions from Parliament to the minister, reducing debate, transparency and scrutiny, even though the government had not shown a legislative backlog or urgent problem. She also said the change had been initiated by the minister rather than sporting organisations or other stakeholders.
The government said the rules will remain open to parliamentary scrutiny and can be disallowed. It also pointed to the new eligibility tests and the limit on how long protection may last. Malcolm Roberts (One Nation) similarly said the Senate could debate and reject a controversial rule, and supported the change as a simpler system that reduces red tape and cost.
Further sources
Votes
The chamber-passage votes come first. Expand a vote to see the party breakdown.
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.
Passed 31 to 18. Support came from Labor, Greens, Jacqui Lambie Network, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal, Nationals, Australia's Voice, and Liberal Party.
Earlier bill-stage votes
Passed 31 to 18. Support came from Labor, Greens, Jacqui Lambie Network, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal, Nationals, Australia's Voice, and Liberal Party.
These are votes on the bill itself rather than amendment votes.
Parliamentary debate
Start here — lead voices
Wells supports the bill because it will create a faster, more flexible framework for protecting major sporting events from unauthorised commercial use and ambush marketingMarketing that falsely suggests an official event connection., while retaining parliamentary scrutiny and existing public-interest exemptions.
Read in Hansard ↗Angie Bell opposes the bill, arguing that the government has not justified replacing parliamentary scrutiny with a process that concentrates power in the minister, even though the coalition supports protecting major sporting event images and branding.
Read in Hansard ↗Michael McCormack says the coalition will not block the bill because protecting major sporting events from the commercial misuse of logos and images is important, but he criticises the limited consultation and cautions against shifting too much power from parliament to the executive.
Read in Hansard ↗Walsh supports the bill because it will let the government protect major sporting events and their sponsors more quickly through a rules-based framework, while retaining parliamentary scrutiny and limits on the duration and scope of protections.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
6 speakers · 6 support
“This Bill will improve responsiveness to an evolving major event calendar, reduce the need for repeated legislative amendments, and ensure protections can be implemented in a timely and proportionate manner.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We Aussies love our sport—of all levels. We love seeing people have a go. Having a go leads to improvement, to a love of physical fitness, to a determination to succeed, to a love of hard work on the training track, to a love of competition and to a lifelong love of health and fitness. Let's foster this to make sure that the next generation continues to play sport and can maybe one day represent Australia at the highest level possible: the Olympic Games. I commend the bill to the Chamber.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill will improve responsiveness to an evolving major event calendar, reduce the need for repeated legislative amendments and ensure protections can be implemented in a timely and proportionate manner.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This piece of legislation protects these games, allows the organisations that deliver them the surety that they need because, they do need to make their money back. These things cost millions and millions of dollars to put on. Turning the lights on at the MCG is a lot of power. Making sure that they've got all of the food, all of the vendors and everything that they need to actually put something like this on and everything surrounding it, the people who are running it need to understand and know that they're going to get their return on investment and that they're going to be protected. That's what this does. It clears the way. We don't have to go through legislation every time we get a major sporting event. I hope we get many major sporting events, because, despite saying that I wasn't really that into it, it is an economic benefit. It's massive. At the 2032 Olympics, there are going to be some sports held in Cairns. The hero shot from Rio de Janeiro coming off from Christ the Redeemer down over Ipanema was awesome. I'd never wanted to go to Brazil, but, after seeing that, I said: 'You know what? I should probably go to Brazil.' I did not go to Brazil, but I thought about it. We're going to show Cairns in that way—coming down over the range, the World Heritage rainforest and looking out over the beautiful Coral Sea. People can play a bit of football, the most popular sport on the planet. Millions of people will look at that. Millions of people will see what my city has to offer and what my region has to offer and maybe they'll think: 'I'm going to swing up to Cairns, spend a bit of time and watch my football team play there. They seem to have a good time. They beat whoever.' That's what we want. We want that knock-on effect, those economic drivers that will also come along with an event such as this.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“But the legacy depends on trust. It depends on ensuring that those who invest have those rights that they have agreed to and that those people who are purchasing products know that they are genuine products. Trust from the sponsors and investors for their contributions will be protected with this bill, as will trust from everyday Australians that, when they attend, participate in or support these events, they'll be treated fairly and protected from misleading and deceptive conduct. That is exactly what this legislation delivers. It strengthens the integrity of the events that we host, it protects the consumers, it supports the investment and it ensures that Australia remains one of the world's most attractive destinations for major international sporting events. We just have to get the Mondial World Cup here at some stage in the future, and I'm sure that will happen in the future—maybe not in my time, but it'll be wonderful to host the soccer World Cup, or football World Cup, here. When the world turns its attention to Australia, we want it to see a nation that's confident, capable, innovative and ready to seize every opportunity.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“As I said, I won't take too much more of the Senate's time other than to say two things. First of all, as we head towards the green and gold runway of the Brisbane 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games, we know that the world's spotlight will be on Australia to deliver world-class international sporting events. I really look forward to the Senate's support of this bill so that the Australian government can support those organisations who are delivering these events over the next couple of years and do that in a way that protects the images, the logos and all of the important mechanisms that this bill will achieve.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
5 speakers · 1 support · 2 oppose · 1 mixed · 1 unclear
“Every major sporting event we successfully host and protect inspires another generation to believe that they too could one day represent Australia. As we look towards the Brisbane 2032 Olympic Games and Paralympic Games, we should absolutely continue to protect the integrity of these events. But in doing so we should also continue protecting the role of this very parliament. Administrative convenience should never become an excuse for reducing parliamentary oversight. Transparency remains one of the cornerstones of good government. For those reasons, while supporting the ongoing protections of major sporting events and protecting major sporting event merchandise, the coalition remains concerned that this bill unnecessarily transfers authority away from the parliament without sufficient justification.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Back to the bill in front of us, this is a bill that changes a process, to give more power to a minister—the same minister who had to pay back the debt—and a bill that nobody has asked for. The government has not justified the need for a change in process. The coalition indeed supports the protection of indicia and images for major sporting events. This bill aims to change the legislative process by which an international event is recognised to receive these protections. The government has not made a clear case as to why the parliament should lose transparency and concentrate powers into the executive and into the minister of the day. I note that the scrutiny of bills committee will convene tomorrow to consider this bill, and I look forward to their assessment of it.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“There is sufficient lead time for a major sporting event of international significance—that is, world cups and the like, major test matches et cetera—to be recognised and protected under the current legislation. Whilst I get that there are long lead times for international sporting events a la the 2032 Brisbane Olympics and Paralympics and while I realise also that stakeholders are not calling for this change, the government has seen fit and the government feels the need that this is important and that it needs to happen now, and, indeed, I don't believe that the coalition will be standing in the way to seeing a blocking of this particular bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Instead of backing grassroots sport, Labor is more interested in protecting their bottom line and creating more uncertainty for the organisations delivering these programs. The coalition supports the protection of indicia and images for major sporting events. The government has not made a clear case as to why the parliament should lose transparency and concentrate powers into the executive and the minister of the day. I note that the scrutiny of bills committee will convene tomorrow to consider this bill, and I will be monitoring the progress with interest.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill is a solution in search of a problem, and the price of that solution is less transparency and more ministerial power. The coalition strongly supports protecting the intellectual property associated with Australia's major sporting events, but will not support administrative convenience being used as an excuse to diminish transparency, accountability and parliamentary scrutiny. For those reasons, the coalition will oppose the bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
1 speaker · 1 support
“One Nation supports this measure. If someone wants to risk hundreds of millions of dollars to stage a sporting event, some level of protection is necessary—or nobody will do it. These are major events: the FIFA football world cup co-hosted by Australia and New Zealand in 2023, the International Cricket Council's T20 men's world cup in 2022 and, of course, the Commonwealth and Olympic games. Sensible taxpayer funding for these events can be justified on the basis of the taxation return from those attending and the increased tourism revenue for years afterwards, and for the facilities built for the future. One Nation strongly supports children playing sport, and that means someone has to build the venues. It's these major events which do that, and this is why they need protection.”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
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Referred to Federation Chamber
Referred to Federation Chamber
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
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
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Second reading agreed to
Recorded vote: 31 to 18.
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 · Third reading agreed to
Recorded vote: 31 to 18.
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.
Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills
Scrutiny Digest 8 of 2026
Considered by scrutiny committee (1 July 2026): Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills; Scrutiny Digest 8 of 2026
APH bill page notes
