Not genuinely voluntary
Critics argued the scheme could become compulsory in practice if banks, businesses or agencies can pressure people to use digital ID, leaving those who prefer paper or in-person processes worse off.
Digital ID (Transitional and Consequential Provisions)
Current status
This bill became law on May 30th, 2024.
Policy area
Government & democracy
What does this bill do?
The minister can make temporary transition rules for up to 12 months to fix unexpected problems when the new digital ID laws start, but only for transitional matters.
Why was it introduced?
Australia’s digital ID system had been operating since 2015 under an unlegislated framework and non-binding agreements, leaving a gap when the new Digital ID Act started. This bill lets the move happen smoothly by shifting existing providers and agencies into the new legal scheme, allowing temporary fix-up rules and making related law changes.
Broader context
Australia’s digital ID system had run since 2015 through the unlegislated Australian Government Digital ID SystemThe government-run system that lets people prove who they are online and access services without repeatedly handing over the same documents. and Trusted Digital Identity FrameworkThe old policy framework that set the rules for digital ID providers before the new law took over., using memoranda of understanding rather than a full statute, so the move to a new Digital ID Act created a practical risk that existing accreditations, agency participation and privacy oversight could be left in limbo. This bill responded by automatically carrying accredited providers and Commonwealth users into the legal scheme, giving the Taxation Commissioner clear authority for services such as myGovIDThe Taxation Office's digital ID service that lets a person prove their identity online and use government services. and Relationship Authorisation ManagerThe Taxation Office service that lets a business owner or other authorised person act for a business online., and allowing short-term fix-up rules. Royal AssentThe final step that turns the bill into an Act so its legal changes can begin. made the transition Act law, but its commencement was tied to the commencement of the Digital ID Act 2023.
Key criticism
The main criticism was that the digital ID package was being pushed through without strong enough safeguards to keep it genuinely voluntary, protect privacy and biometrics, and preserve workable non-digital alternatives. Those objections were raised most consistently by Coalition speakers, with some crossbench support for stronger privacy and access protections, while concerns also surfaced in defeated Senate amendment proposals rather than broad cross-party opposition on every point.
Who supported it?
Senator Katy Gallagher introduced this bill. It passed with support from Labor, Greens, Jacqui Lambie Network, some crossbench members; opposed by Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, UAP, some crossbench members.
Introduced in Senate 30 Nov 2023
Passed Senate 27 Mar 2024 Aye 33 No 26
Passed House 16 May 2024
Became law 30 May 2024
Did it become law?
Yes
Became law 30 May 2024
Final passage
Recorded final vote
1 counted final-passage vote was recorded.
Passage speed
182 days
From introduction to the latest recorded parliamentary step
Meaning
What does this bill do?
-
The minister can make temporary transition rules for up to 12 months to fix unexpected problems when the new digital ID laws start, but only for transitional matters.
-
Existing government digital ID providers already accredited under the old framework automatically move into the new legal accreditation schemeThe new approval system that decides which digital ID providers are trusted to operate under the Act., so they do not have to apply again.
-
Existing Commonwealth agencies already using the Australian Government Digital ID SystemThe government-run system that lets people prove who they are online and access services without repeatedly handing over the same documents. are automatically moved into the new legal system, helping services continue without interruption.
-
The Privacy CommissionerThe privacy regulator who can check whether accredited digital ID providers are following the extra privacy rules. can check whether accredited digital ID providers are following the extra privacy rules and any agreement requiring privacy standards equal to Australian Privacy PrinciplesThe core privacy rules that the bill uses as a benchmark when it sets extra privacy conditions for digital ID providers..
-
The Australian Taxation Office gets an express legal function to run digital ID services, including myGovIDThe Taxation Office's digital ID service that lets a person prove their identity online and use government services. and business authorisation services, under digital ID law rather than tax law.
Show source excerpts
-
Subitem 10(3) provides that rules made under this item, within 12 months after commencement, may modify the effect of provisions in this Bill or the principal Bill, in relation to matters of a transitional nature. Those provisions will then have effect, in relation to the transitional matter, as if they were so modified.
Digital ID (Transitional and Consequential Provisions) explanatory memorandum -
Item 2 provides that the Digital ID Regulator will be taken, immediately after the commencement of this Bill, to have decided for the purposes of subclause 15(2) of the principal Bill to accredit the entities specified in column 1 of an item of the table in item 2, as the kind of accredited entity specified in column 2 of the table in item 2, and to have imposed the conditions (if any) on that accreditation for the purposes of subclause 17(2) of the principal Bill as specified in column 3 of the table in item 2. These are entities that have already been accredited by the Australian Government under the TDIF, as the specified kind of accredited entity and subject to the same conditions (if any).
Digital ID (Transitional and Consequential Provisions) explanatory memorandum -
In addition, certain Commonwealth entities which are currently participating in the unlegislated AGDIS will be taken to be participating in the AGDIS that is regulated by the principal Digital ID Bill. This avoids those entities needing to re-apply to the new Regulator to participate in the AGDIS under the Bill. This will help ensure these entities can continue providing uninterrupted services to the Australian community upon the commencement of the principal Bill, which will apply additional privacy and other safeguards.
Second reading speech -
This item will insert a new paragraph (g) into subsection 33C(1) of the Privacy Act. This new paragraph will provide that the Information Commissioner may conduct an assessment of whether accredited entities are complying with:
Digital ID (Transitional and Consequential Provisions) explanatory memorandum -
This item will insert a new section 3J at the end of Part IA of the Taxation Administration Act, which will confer upon the Commissioner of Taxation the functions of providing services, or access to services, within digital ID systems. This may include participating in the AGDIS as one or more kinds of accredited entities.
Digital ID (Transitional and Consequential Provisions) explanatory memorandum
Context
Broader context for this bill
Australia’s digital ID system had run since 2015 through the unlegislated Australian Government Digital ID SystemThe government-run system that lets people prove who they are online and access services without repeatedly handing over the same documents. and Trusted Digital Identity FrameworkThe old policy framework that set the rules for digital ID providers before the new law took over., using memoranda of understanding rather than a full statute, so the move to a new Digital ID Act created a practical risk that existing accreditations, agency participation and privacy oversight could be left in limbo. This bill responded by automatically carrying accredited providers and Commonwealth users into the legal scheme, giving the Taxation Commissioner clear authority for services such as myGovIDThe Taxation Office's digital ID service that lets a person prove their identity online and use government services. and Relationship Authorisation ManagerThe Taxation Office service that lets a business owner or other authorised person act for a business online., and allowing short-term fix-up rules. Royal AssentThe final step that turns the bill into an Act so its legal changes can begin. made the transition Act law, but its commencement was tied to the commencement of the Digital ID Act 2023.
- 2015
Australian Government digital ID systemThe government-run system that lets people prove who they are online and access services without repeatedly handing over the same documents. begins operating without a statute
The explanatory memorandum says the Australian Government Digital ID SystemThe government-run system that lets people prove who they are online and access services without repeatedly handing over the same documents. and Trusted Digital Identity FrameworkThe old policy framework that set the rules for digital ID providers before the new law took over. had been run since 2015 under an unlegislated framework and non-binding memoranda of understanding.
Digital ID (Transitional and Consequential Provisions) explanatory memorandum ↗ - 22 Dec 2020
Privacy impact assessment is finalised for Services Australia attribute collection
The explanatory memorandum says an independent privacy impact assessment for Services Australia’s collection of attributes in the digital ID system was finalised on this date and all recommendations were implemented.
Digital ID (Transitional and Consequential Provisions) explanatory memorandum ↗ - 30 Nov 2023
Government introduces the transition bill for the new Digital ID law
The bill was introduced to move existing accredited providers and Commonwealth participants into the statutory scheme and allow temporary rules to fix unforeseen transition problems.
Parliamentary timeline ↗ - 16 May 2024
Parliament passes the bill
Final passage cleared the way for existing services such as myGovIDThe Taxation Office's digital ID service that lets a person prove their identity online and use government services., Relationship Authorisation ManagerThe Taxation Office service that lets a business owner or other authorised person act for a business online. and Services Australia’s identity exchangeA middle service that passes identity checks and related data between the provider and the agency or business that needs them. to continue under the new legal framework.
Parliamentary timeline ↗ - 30 May 2024
Royal AssentThe final step that turns the bill into an Act so its legal changes can begin. made the transition Act law
Royal AssentThe final step that turns the bill into an Act so its legal changes can begin. turned the bill into an Act, but the Act’s own commencement clause tied its start to the commencement of the Digital ID Act 2023.
Parliamentary timeline ↗
Legislative route
How did it move through Parliament?
House Senate
Introduced 30 Nov 2023
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 30 Nov 2023
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
Economics Legislation Committee; Committee report (28/02/2024) review 30 Nov 2023
Referred to Committee (30/11/2023): Senate Economics Legislation Committee; Committee report (28/02/2024)
Referred to committee
APH bill page notesSenate second reading agreed Aye 33 No 26 27 Mar 2024
Recorded vote: 33 to 26.
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 third reading agreed Aye 33 No 26 27 Mar 2024
Recorded vote: 33 to 26.
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Third reading agreed to
Introduced 14 May 2024
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 15 May 2024
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 15 May 2024
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Sent to Federation Chamber for debate 15 May 2024
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Referred to Federation Chamber
Federation Chamber debate 15 May 2024
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Second reading debate
House second reading agreed 15 May 2024
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
Returned from Federation Chamber 16 May 2024
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Reported from Federation Chamber
House third reading agreed 16 May 2024
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Third reading agreed to
Passed both houses 16 May 2024
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Finally passed both Houses
Assent 30 May 2024
The Governor-General gave Royal AssentThe final step that turns the bill into an Act so its legal changes can begin., turning the bill into an Act.
Key criticism
The main case against this bill
The main criticism was that the digital ID package was being pushed through without strong enough safeguards to keep it genuinely voluntary, protect privacy and biometrics, and preserve workable non-digital alternatives. Those objections were raised most consistently by Coalition speakers, with some crossbench support for stronger privacy and access protections, while concerns also surfaced in defeated Senate amendment proposals rather than broad cross-party opposition on every point.
Criticism centred more on safeguards and rollout than on the idea of digital ID itself.
Privacy and surveillance safeguards too weak
Opponents said the bill did not do enough to limit use and disclosure of personal and biometric informationPersonal body-based data, such as a face image or fingerprint, that can be used to verify a person's identity., and warned it could expand government or law-enforcement access before wider privacy law reforms were in place.
Rushed process and rejected protections
A repeated complaint was that Parliament was asked to pass the framework too quickly, after the government rejected amendments aimed at stronger scrutiny, service protections for non-users and tighter limits on exemptions and disclosures.
Further sources
Votes
Recorded votes
How the bill itself passed
The chamber-passage votes come first. Expand a vote to see the party breakdown.
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.
Carried Senate passed the bill
Passed 33 to 26. Support came from Labor, Greens, Jacqui Lambie Network, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and UAP. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Carried
Senate passed the bill
Party Aye / No
Labor 15 / 0
Liberal Party 0 / 15
Greens 11 / 0
Unknown 5 / 4
Nationals 0 / 4
One Nation 0 / 2
Independent 1 / 0
Jacqui Lambie Network 1 / 0
UAP 0 / 1
Earlier bill-stage votes
Carried Senate cleared second reading
Passed 33 to 26. Support came from Labor, Greens, Jacqui Lambie Network, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and UAP. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Carried
Senate cleared second reading
Party Aye / No
Labor 15 / 0
Liberal Party 0 / 15
Greens 11 / 0
Unknown 5 / 4
Nationals 0 / 4
One Nation 0 / 2
Independent 1 / 0
Jacqui Lambie Network 1 / 0
UAP 0 / 1
Amendments at a glance
Amendments grouped by chamber. These cards include amendment outcomes recorded without a counted division.
Senate
Carried Carry digital ID disclosure-reporting amendments
Passed 33 to 26. Support came from Labor, Greens, Jacqui Lambie Network, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and UAP. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Carried
Carry digital ID disclosure-reporting amendments
The carried amendments added extra reporting around access to digital ID information.
Party Aye / No
Labor 15 / 0
Liberal Party 0 / 15
Greens 11 / 0
Unknown 5 / 4
Nationals 0 / 4
One Nation 0 / 2
Independent 1 / 0
Jacqui Lambie Network 1 / 0
UAP 0 / 1
Carried Set digital ID rollout phases
Passed 33 to 26. Support came from Labor, Greens, Jacqui Lambie Network, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and UAP. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Carried
Set digital ID rollout phases
This preserved the phased expansion model for digital ID rather than narrowing who could be brought into the system.
Party Aye / No
Labor 15 / 0
Liberal Party 0 / 15
Greens 11 / 0
Unknown 5 / 4
Nationals 0 / 4
One Nation 0 / 2
Independent 1 / 0
Jacqui Lambie Network 1 / 0
UAP 0 / 1
Defeated Tighten digital ID privacy safeguards
Defeated 26 to 33. Support came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and UAP. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, Jacqui Lambie Network, and minor parties and independents. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
Defeated
Tighten digital ID privacy safeguards
Defeating the package left the bill's access and commencement settings broader than the proposed amendments would have made them.
Party Aye / No
Labor 0 / 15
Liberal Party 15 / 0
Greens 0 / 11
Unknown 4 / 5
Nationals 4 / 0
One Nation 2 / 0
Independent 0 / 1
Jacqui Lambie Network 0 / 1
UAP 1 / 0
Defeated Restrict biometric sharing powers
Defeated 14 to 26. Support came from Greens, One Nation, UAP, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, Jacqui Lambie Network, Nationals, and minor parties and independents.
Defeated
Restrict biometric sharing powers
The vote kept the bill's stronger biometric and disclosure controls from being inserted into the law.
Party Aye / No
Labor 0 / 15
Greens 11 / 0
Liberal Party 0 / 5
Unknown 0 / 4
Independent 1 / 0
Jacqui Lambie Network 0 / 1
Nationals 0 / 1
One Nation 1 / 0
UAP 1 / 0
Carried Carry additional Digital ID safeguards amendments
The Senate agreed on voices to further amendments in the Digital ID bill package recorded on sheet 2477.
Carried
Carry additional Digital ID safeguards amendments
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
This list includes amendment votes, procedural votes and votes on the bill itself.
Parliamentary debate
Who spoke, and what they said
Start here — lead voices
Sponsor speech Supports
Katy Gallagher
Gallagher supports the bill as the companion measure that will make the move to the new digital ID framework orderly, efficient and fair.
Read in Hansard ↗ Lead opposing voice Opposes
Colin Boyce
Boyce opposes the bill and says it goes too far because it is not truly voluntary, lacks strong privacy and cybersecurity safeguards, and could disadvantage people who want to keep using non-digital services.
Read in Hansard ↗ Lead supporting voice Supports
Zoe Daniel
Zoe Daniel supports the bill, saying she is inclined to vote for it because it would modernise secure identity verification and bring practical benefits.
Read in Hansard ↗ Lead non-major voice Mixed
Kylea Tink
Tink says the bill is a useful step forward and supports the move to digital ID, but only if privacy, human rights and access protections are strong enough.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
Labor
8 speakers · 8 support
Labor
8 speakers · 8 support
-
Meryl Swanson Swanson supports the bill and says it will make digital identity more secure, more convenient, and better protected against data breaches.
“This bill is not being rushed, and it is not being moved without thoughtful consideration on how we implement it. We are putting in the hard yards now and we are getting this right. I'm proud to be part of a government that is delivering for every Australian. Whether you're a student, a senior, a small-business owner or anyone in between, the digital ID is a decision for you to streamline how you use your ID and how you choose to be part of a digital future. We want to equip Australians to be part of a digital future.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Katy Gallagher ★ Gallagher supports the bill as the companion measure that will make the move to the new digital ID framework orderly, efficient and fair.
“Digital ID Bill 2023”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Louise Miller-Frost Miller-Frost supports the bill and says it will make digital identity safer by reducing identity theft and scams while adding privacy, consumer and regulatory safeguards.
“The Digital ID Bill is about the safety and security of Australians and of their digital identity. We've all been horrified by the data breaches and the ensuing issues that come from them—with people being vulnerable to identity theft and scams. It's an entirely voluntary exercise, it has built-in security measures and it has a regulator to ensure compliance. I commend the bill to the House.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Stephen Jones Stephen Jones supports the bill because it sets up a smooth and orderly transition to the new digital ID framework and makes the consequential legal changes needed for it to work properly.
“The bill that the government is introducing today sets out transitional and consequential arrangements that, together, ensure an orderly, efficient and fair transition to the new statutory framework under the Digital ID Bill 2024.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Graham Perrett Graham Perrett supports the bill, saying it provides the transition arrangements needed to move Australia's digital ID system into a legislated framework.
“The Digital ID (Transitional and Consequential Provisions) Bill supports the principal bill by making arrangements to ensure smooth transitions from existing unlegislated frameworks. The Trusted Digital Identity Framework will be replaced by the new Digital ID Accreditation Rules, as laid out by the principal bill. Participants in the unlegislated Australian government digital ID system will be transitioned to the new, legislated system. What this means in practice is automatic accreditation in the new system for entities that were accredited under the old system. There are provisions to make rules, after the commencement of the bill, to take future complex information technology infrastructure changes into account. This bill also amends key security and administrative Commonwealth legislation to ensure the principal bill works as intended. The acts to be amended are the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977, the Age Discrimination Act 2004, the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979, the Competition and Consumer Act 2010, the Taxation Administration Act 1953 and the Privacy Act 1988.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Tania Lawrence Tania Lawrence supports the bill, saying it will make digital identity safer and more convenient by reducing repeated sharing of personal documents while keeping the scheme voluntary.
“In summary, the use of this digital ID will be voluntary. Organisations will need to provide alternatives for those who do not wish to use the system. It won't be difficult, as each organisation or government department already has a system for requiring and proving ID. This bill will reduce the need for people to share their personal and identification documentation and other information repeatedly with the many departments and businesses that now require it as standard practice. This bill will make people safer. It will make the holding of our personal identification more secure and convenient—and we'll ensure it's voluntary. I commend the bill to the House, and I thank the minister for her stewardship.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Michelle Ananda-Rajah Michelle Ananda-Rajah supports the bill as a way to make digital ID more secure, voluntary and useful across government and the private sector.
“I commend these bills to the House as important planks in our progress towards a more secure digital future and a productive, streamlined and connected economy, and as a means of providing smoother access to services for all.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Anne Stanley Stanley supports the bill and says it will expand and strengthen digital ID while adding privacy safeguards, stronger regulation, and greater access to services.
“Digital ID is a major reform. Australians are increasingly becoming accustomed to the use of digital IDs in various forms, the benefits of which are quite clear, but they also are becoming increasingly worried about their privacy. These bills seek to establish the digital ID scheme to allow Australians to access services more easily whilst ensuring their privacy is not compromised and instead enhanced. Digital ID will bring enormous social and economic benefits to Australians, and it is responsible of the government to ensure that there are systems in place to maximise that benefit. It is an important reform that must be done correctly, and I commend the work of the ministers and departments in putting together the legislation. I commend the bill to the House.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Coalition
8 speakers · 7 oppose · 1 mixed
Coalition
8 speakers · 7 oppose · 1 mixed
-
Colin Boyce ★ Boyce opposes the bill and says it goes too far because it is not truly voluntary, lacks strong privacy and cybersecurity safeguards, and could disadvantage people who want to keep using non-digital services.
“In conclusion, Labor's bill does not adequately ensure it is truly voluntary. Every Australian deserves the same quality of service, regardless of how they're accessing it, be it through digital ID or face-to-face. The government should not proceed with this bill until such time as they've reformed the Privacy Act. There should be simultaneous private sector participation in the AGDIS, ensuring that ID is a truly national whole-of-economy solution. The coalition has worked hard and in good faith to address the flaws in these bills by moving amendments in the Senate. Our amendments would have enhanced the privacy protections for Australians who choose to use digital ID. These amendments were not supported and, accordingly, I oppose the Digital ID Bill 2024 as I feel it will cause more harm than good, and this is nothing more than over reach by the current Labor government.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Michael McCormack McCormack says the coalition will oppose the bill because it was rushed through Parliament and does not do enough to guarantee voluntariness, privacy and proper scrutiny.
“Accordingly, the coalition voted to oppose the government's digital identity legislation because, as I said a short time ago, it is half baked—that's a good description of it. We want to make sure that any legislation that comes before the House is what it ought to be and is given proper consideration not just in this place, the parliament on the hill, but indeed right throughout this wide brown land.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Barnaby Joyce Barnaby Joyce opposes the bill because he says it is not genuinely voluntary and would let banks and other businesses demand digital ID, which he argues erodes anonymity and personal freedom.
“One of the cruxes of this bill is: is it truly voluntary? Can people say, 'No, I don't want this to be a part of my engagement with the government or part of my engagement with private business'? The point is that the government did not accept the amendments to make it genuinely voluntary, and, as they didn't, it's involuntary. And, as it is such, it can't be supported.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Pat Conaghan Conaghan opposes the bill, arguing it would erode privacy and personal freedom by expanding government control over people’s information.
“There are many diverse reasons that people come and see me and are opposing these bills. But the biggest one is the freedoms that we enjoy right now, followed by the real fears that their information will end up in the wrong hands. This is exactly why we should not support these bills.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Sam Birrell Birrell says the coalition will oppose the bill, arguing the government rushed it through without enough scrutiny and refused amendments that would have strengthened privacy, voluntariness, and offline access protections.
“We oppose these bills with regret. I really believe debate, cooperation and compromise in the Senate could have led to much better bills. The efficiencies and productivities of a really good effective digital ID system, with people's privacy respected and with people's voluntary participation respected, and with people's trust—which would have led to more voluntary participation in the system—would have led to a much better situation than we have now and much better bills. With regret, we oppose the bills.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Melissa Price Melissa Price says the coalition will not support the bill because Labor rejected amendments she says were needed to make digital ID truly voluntary, protect paper-based alternatives, and fix privacy and scrutiny concerns.
“In conclusion, it's time those opposite reconsidered adopting the amendments we put forward in the Senate. But until such time I won't be supporting this legislation, and I urge the government to take very seriously the concerns of my Durack constituents that I've outlined.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
David Gillespie Gillespie does not commit to backing the bill and says it needs a proper committee review before he will decide how to vote.
“All in all, it's a pretty complex issue. I just think the issue is not urgent. It needs proper and thorough evaluation. It would be good to send it off to a committee that can really pull it to pieces, and we'll get a better product in the end. I reserve my rights on how I proceed in the vote on this issue.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Terry Young Terry Young says the coalition will oppose the bill as it stands because it undermines freedom of choice and could make digital ID feel effectively mandatory.
“As far as I'm concerned, the coalition has made the right decision in opposing the bill as it stands. The amendments would have made it a greater debate. I think the government have done themselves a disservice by not even considering the amendments and rushing it through because they're trying to hide it through budget week. I think that they will pay the price for that, because there will be a backlash from the electorate, because the Australian people, more than anything, want their freedoms protected.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Minor parties and independents
4 speakers · 1 support · 2 oppose · 1 mixed
Minor parties and independents
4 speakers · 1 support · 2 oppose · 1 mixed
-
Kylea Tink ★ Tink says the bill is a useful step forward and supports the move to digital ID, but only if privacy, human rights and access protections are strong enough.
“Ultimately, this bill does much to move us forward. But we need to move forward with caution, consideration and compassion. It is a significant piece of legislation that serves an important purpose in strengthening privacy safeguards, but the best interests of the individual must be paramount in the design of the scheme.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Russell Broadbent Broadbent opposes the bill, arguing it is unnecessary, unsafe and a threat to freedom because the government has not shown why digital ID is needed or that it can protect the data.
“If you are really going to protect freedoms in Australia, you oppose this bill and you oppose it with all your strength and all your arm.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Bob Katter Katter opposes the bill, arguing it hands the government too much power over privacy and movement and amounts to a Big Brother system with facial recognition.
“To the speakers supporting this bill: maybe the education system doesn't have Brave New World or 1984 on their reading lists. But in Queensland, up until the nineties, anyway, I can assure you they were on the reading list, and every child, every young person, in Queensland, read Aldous Huxley's Brave New World and George Orwell's 1984. The characterisation in those books, as in all the movies that have been made about these two wonderful books, was: Big Brother is watching. You people are advocating Big Brother watching. These people will win the next election, and you'll see what it's like when they have access to every movement that you make.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Zoe Daniel ★ Zoe Daniel supports the bill, saying she is inclined to vote for it because it would modernise secure identity verification and bring practical benefits.
“On balance, I am inclined to vote for this bill based on the benefits it presents to bringing up to date secure and modern verification of one's identity. But, for the moment, I will reiterate my concerns that this must be closely monitored to guard against unintended consequences.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Record
Full record
- Act title
- Digital ID (Transitional and Consequential Provisions) Act 2024
- Act number
- Act No. 26, 2024
- Became law
- 30 May 2024
- Takes effect
- The whole of this Act At the same time as the Digital ID Act 2023 commences. However, the provisions do not commence at all if that Act does not commence.
- Registered
- 31 May 2024
- Administered by
- Department of Finance
- Final law metadata was collected from the APH progress table; commencement rows were parsed from the bill text.
- Status
- Act -- Collected from the APH bill page.
- Originating house
- Senate
- 30 Nov 2023
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.
- 30 Nov 2023
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.
- 27 Mar 2024
Senate · Second reading agreed to
Recorded vote: 33 to 26.
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 Mar 2024
Senate · Third reading agreed to
Recorded vote: 33 to 26.
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
- 14 May 2024
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.
- 15 May 2024
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.
- 15 May 2024
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 15 May 2024
House · Referred to Federation Chamber
Referred to Federation Chamber
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 15 May 2024
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 15 May 2024
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.
- 16 May 2024
House · Reported from Federation Chamber
Reported from Federation Chamber
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 16 May 2024
House · Third reading agreed to
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
- 16 May 2024
Parliament · Finally passed both Houses
Passed both houses
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
- 30 May 2024
Assent · Assent
Assent
The Governor-General gave Royal AssentThe final step that turns the bill into an Act so its legal changes can begin., turning the bill into an Act.
Senate Economics Legislation Committee; Committee report (28/02/2024)
Referred to committee
Referred to Committee (30 Nov 2023): Senate Economics Legislation Committee; Committee report (28 Feb 2024)
APH bill page notes