Definitions may be too broad
Senator Maria Kovacic argued that terms such as weapons industry business entity were so broad that universities could struggle to know which companies, technologies or ordinary products were captured.
Higher Education Support Amendment (End Dirty University Partnerships)
Current status
This bill is currently before Parliament.
Policy area
Education & skills
What does this bill do?
The bill would stop higher education providers that receive Commonwealth grants under Part 2-2 of the Higher Education Support Act from entering into partnerships with, or investing in, prohibited entities.
Why was it introduced?
Senator Mehreen Faruqi introduced the bill to force Commonwealth-funded universities to separate themselves from industries the Greens describe as harmful to people, students and the public good. The explanatory memorandum links the bill to student motions calling for universities to divestTo end or dispose of a financial relationship. Under the bill, covered providers would have to end prohibited partnerships and divest prohibited investments within the relevant six-month period. from weapons and fossil fuel industries. In debate, Greens senators also pointed to university links with weapons manufacturers, fossil fuel companies and gambling-industry funding, while arguing that underfunded public universities should be funded publicly rather than through those relationships.
Broader context
The bill sits in a wider argument about whether public universities should accept money, investments or board-level influence from industries that some students, staff and parliamentarians say conflict with universities’ public-good role. The official materials frame the bill as a response to student divestmentTo end or dispose of a financial relationship. Under the bill, covered providers would have to end prohibited partnerships and divest prohibited investments within the relevant six-month period. motions, while the Senate debate added examples involving weapons, fossil fuel and gambling relationships and a sharp Coalition critique that the proposal was too broad and impractical.
Key criticism
The collected record shows substantive opposition from Liberal senators during the 6 November 2025 Senate debate. Their central argument was not that universities should ignore ethics, but that this bill would use broad legal categories to restrict research partnerships, investments and board appointments in ways they said would be vague, impractical and damaging.
Who supported it?
Senator Mehreen Faruqi introduced this bill. Supportive speeches so far have come from Greens.
Introduced in Senate 13 Feb 2025
Debate underway in Senate 06 Nov 2025
Not yet reached House —
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
482 days
Updated 10 June 2026.
Meaning
What does this bill do?
-
The bill would stop higher education providers that receive Commonwealth grants under Part 2-2 of the Higher Education Support Act from entering into partnerships with, or investing in, prohibited entities.
-
Prohibited entities would include fossil fuel, gambling, tobacco and weapons industry business entities, plus any other business entity later prescribed by the minister and approved by both Houses of Parliament.
-
Providers would have to publish disclosure reports for new prohibited partnerships or investments within 30 days, and for existing prohibited partnerships or investments within 90 days after the new rules start.
-
Providers would have to end existing prohibited partnerships and divestTo end or dispose of a financial relationship. Under the bill, covered providers would have to end prohibited partnerships and divest prohibited investments within the relevant six-month period. prohibited investments within six months of commencement, or within six months after an entity later becomes prohibited.
-
The bill would also stop these providers from appointing a person to their governing body if the person has an investmentThe use of money or financial assets to gain a return, including income, capital gain or another form of return. in a prohibited entityAn entity the bill would treat as off-limits for covered providers. The bill names fossil fuel, gambling, tobacco and weapons industry business entities, and allows further entities to be prescribed with parliamentary approval. or sits on the board of a prohibited entityAn entity the bill would treat as off-limits for covered providers. The bill names fossil fuel, gambling, tobacco and weapons industry business entities, and allows further entities to be prescribed with parliamentary approval..
-
If a provider suffers a quantifiable loss while complying with the divestmentTo end or dispose of a financial relationship. Under the bill, covered providers would have to end prohibited partnerships and divest prohibited investments within the relevant six-month period. rule, the Commonwealth may pay reasonable compensation agreed with the provider.
-
If passed, the whole bill would start the day after Royal AssentThe formal approval that turns a bill passed by Parliament into an Act. This bill would start the day after Royal Assent if passed.. In the collected APH record it was still before the Senate and had not become an Act.
Show source excerpts
-
A higher education provider that receives a grant under Part 2-2 must not enter into a partnership with, or make an investment in, a prohibited entity.
Higher Education Support Amendment (End Dirty University Partnerships) introduced bill text -
prohibited entity means: (a) a fossil fuel industry business entity; or (b) a gambling industry business entity; or (c) a tobacco industry business entity; or (d) a weapons industry business entity; or (e) a business entity prescribed by the minister
Higher Education Support Amendment (End Dirty University Partnerships) introduced bill text -
The disclosure report must be published on the higher education provider’s website within 30 days... [and] within 90 days after this section commences.
Higher Education Support Amendment (End Dirty University Partnerships) introduced bill text -
by the end of the 6 month period starting on the day this section commences; or... by the end of the 6 month period starting on the day the entity first meets the definition of a prohibited entity.
Higher Education Support Amendment (End Dirty University Partnerships) introduced bill text -
must not appoint to its governing body a person that: (a) has an investment in a prohibited entity; or (b) is a member of the board of a prohibited entity.
Higher Education Support Amendment (End Dirty University Partnerships) introduced bill text -
the Commonwealth may pay the higher education provider such reasonable compensation for the loss as the Commonwealth and the provider agree on.
Higher Education Support Amendment (End Dirty University Partnerships) introduced bill text -
This clause stipulates that the Act will take effect on the day after it receives Royal Assent.
Higher Education Support Amendment (End Dirty University Partnerships) explanatory memorandum
Context
Broader context for this bill
The bill sits in a wider argument about whether public universities should accept money, investments or board-level influence from industries that some students, staff and parliamentarians say conflict with universities’ public-good role. The official materials frame the bill as a response to student divestmentTo end or dispose of a financial relationship. Under the bill, covered providers would have to end prohibited partnerships and divest prohibited investments within the relevant six-month period. motions, while the Senate debate added examples involving weapons, fossil fuel and gambling relationships and a sharp Coalition critique that the proposal was too broad and impractical.
- Before 13 Feb 2025
Student motions call for university divestmentTo end or dispose of a financial relationship. Under the bill, covered providers would have to end prohibited partnerships and divest prohibited investments within the relevant six-month period.
The explanatory memorandum says the bill followed motions at several universities by student groups demanding divestmentTo end or dispose of a financial relationship. Under the bill, covered providers would have to end prohibited partnerships and divest prohibited investments within the relevant six-month period. from what it calls dirty industries, especially weapons and fossil fuel industries.
Explanatory memorandum ↗ - 13 Feb 2025
Faruqi introduces university divestmentTo end or dispose of a financial relationship. Under the bill, covered providers would have to end prohibited partnerships and divest prohibited investments within the relevant six-month period. bill
Senator Mehreen Faruqi introduced the bill in the Senate and moved the second reading, starting debate on disclosure, divestmentTo end or dispose of a financial relationship. Under the bill, covered providers would have to end prohibited partnerships and divest prohibited investments within the relevant six-month period. and governing-body restrictions for Commonwealth-funded providers.
Parliament of Australia ↗ - 21 July 2025
Bill lapses at end of Parliament
The APH progress record says the bill lapsed at the end of Parliament, stopping its earlier progress unless restored.
Parliament of Australia ↗ - 23 July 2025
Bill returns to the Senate Notice PaperThe official list of business before a parliamentary house. Restoring the bill to the Notice Paper put it back before the Senate after it lapsed.
The Senate restored the bill to the Notice PaperThe official list of business before a parliamentary house. Restoring the bill to the Notice Paper put it back before the Senate after it lapsed., leaving it again before the Senate in the collected record.
Parliament of Australia ↗ - August 2025
Greens cite fossil fuel university links
In the later Senate debate, Senator Faruqi cited an August 2025 Australia Institute report as finding that 26 of Australia’s 37 public universities took money from fossil fuel companies.
Second reading debate ↗ - 06 Nov 2025
Senate debate tests support and opposition
Debate resumed with Greens senators supporting divestmentTo end or dispose of a financial relationship. Under the bill, covered providers would have to end prohibited partnerships and divest prohibited investments within the relevant six-month period. and Liberal senators opposing the bill as broad, vague and likely to harm research, innovation and university partnerships.
Senate Hansard ↗
Legislative route
How did it move through Parliament?
House Senate
Introduced 13 Feb 2025
The bill was formally presented in the Senate and read a first time, starting its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
Second reading moved 13 Feb 2025
Senator Mehreen Faruqi moved the second reading and tabled the explanatory memorandum, opening debate on the bill’s purpose and principles.
Lapsed at end of Parliament 21 July 2025
The APH record says the bill lapsed at the end of Parliament.
Restored to Notice PaperThe official list of business before a parliamentary house. Restoring the bill to the Notice Paper put it back before the Senate after it lapsed. 23 July 2025
The bill was restored to the Senate Notice PaperThe official list of business before a parliamentary house. Restoring the bill to the Notice Paper put it back before the Senate after it lapsed. after lapsing.
Second reading moved again 06 Nov 2025
After restoration, the second reading was moved again in the Senate.
Second reading moved
Second reading debate 06 Nov 2025
Senators debated the bill, with Greens senators supporting divestmentTo end or dispose of a financial relationship. Under the bill, covered providers would have to end prohibited partnerships and divest prohibited investments within the relevant six-month period. and Liberal senators opposing the proposal.
Key criticism
The main case against this bill
The collected record shows substantive opposition from Liberal senators during the 6 November 2025 Senate debate. Their central argument was not that universities should ignore ethics, but that this bill would use broad legal categories to restrict research partnerships, investments and board appointments in ways they said would be vague, impractical and damaging.
No committee report, proposed amendments, recorded votes or government speech were collected for this bill, so the criticism record is mainly the Senate speeches available in the local corpus.
Board rules could catch indirect investments
Opponents said the governing-body rule could be difficult to administer because a proposed board member might hold an indirect investmentThe use of money or financial assets to gain a return, including income, capital gain or another form of return. through superannuation or other funds.
Research partnerships and innovation could suffer
Senator Leah Blyth argued that the bill could remove funding from research and development, restrict defence-related and technology work, and disadvantage Australian universities.
Universities should retain more choice
Liberal speakers framed the proposal as the Greens deciding which industries universities could work with, rather than trusting universities to manage ethical partnerships themselves.
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
Sponsor speech Supports
Mehreen Faruqi
Mehreen Faruqi supports the bill as its sponsor.
Read in Hansard ↗ Lead opposing voice Opposes
Leah Blyth
Leah Blyth opposes the bill.
Read in Hansard ↗ Lead voice Supports
David Shoebridge
David Shoebridge supports the bill.
Read in Hansard ↗ Lead voice Supports
Larissa Waters
Larissa Waters supports the Greens bill.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
Coalition
2 speakers · 2 oppose
Coalition
2 speakers · 2 oppose
-
Leah Blyth ★ Leah Blyth opposes the bill.
“I rise today to speak against the Higher Education Support Amendment (End Dirty University Partnerships) Bill 2025.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Maria Kovacic Maria Kovacic opposes the bill.
“It is a bill that's actually designed to remove money from research, prevent innovation and give Australian universities a competitive disadvantage”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Greens
4 speakers · 5 contributions · 4 support
Greens
4 speakers · 5 contributions · 4 support
-
David Shoebridge ★ David Shoebridge supports the bill.
“I rise to indicate my strong support for the Higher Education Support Amendment (End Dirty University Partnerships) Bill 2025”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Mehreen Faruqi ★ 2 contributions Mehreen Faruqi supports the bill and repeats the case for disclosure, divestmentTo end or dispose of a financial relationship. Under the bill, covered providers would have to end prohibited partnerships and divest prohibited investments within the relevant six-month period. and governing-body restrictions.
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Mehreen Faruqi on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Mehreen Faruqi supports the bill as its sponsor. She says public universities should not have monetary partnerships, investments or governing-body links with weapons, fossil fuel, gambling and tobacco industries, and argues that universities should be publicly funded to serve the public good.
“This bill prohibits monetary partnerships and investments between public universities and dirty industries like fossil fuels, weapons, tobacco and gambling.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗Second reading speech
Mehreen Faruqi supports the bill and repeats the case for disclosure, divestmentTo end or dispose of a financial relationship. Under the bill, covered providers would have to end prohibited partnerships and divest prohibited investments within the relevant six-month period. and governing-body restrictions. She links the proposal to university relationships with weapons manufacturers, fossil fuel companies and gambling interests, and says universities should advance public good rather than corporate interests.
“This bill prohibits monetary partnerships and investments between public universities and dirty industries like fossil fuels, weapons, gambling and tobacco.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗ -
Larissa Waters ★ Larissa Waters supports the Greens bill.
“I rise to strongly support our Greens private senators' bill the Higher Education Support Amendment (End Dirty University Partnerships) Bill 2025.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Nick McKim Nick McKim supports the bill.
“Our universities should always act and behave in the public interest. They have a moral obligation as cornerstone institutions in our society.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Record
Full record
- Status
- Before Senate -- Collected from the APH bill page.
- Originating house
- Senate
- Bill type
- Private senator's bill
- 13 Feb 2025
Senate · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented in the Senate and read a first time, starting its parliamentary journey.
- 13 Feb 2025
Senate · Second reading moved
Second reading moved
Senator Mehreen Faruqi moved the second reading and tabled the explanatory memorandum, opening debate on the bill’s purpose and principles.
- 21 July 2025
Senate · Lapsed at end of Parliament
Lapsed at end of Parliament
The APH record says the bill lapsed at the end of Parliament.
- 23 July 2025
Senate · Restored to Notice Paper
Restored to Notice PaperThe official list of business before a parliamentary house. Restoring the bill to the Notice Paper put it back before the Senate after it lapsed.
The bill was restored to the Senate Notice PaperThe official list of business before a parliamentary house. Restoring the bill to the Notice Paper put it back before the Senate after it lapsed. after lapsing.
- 06 Nov 2025
Senate · Second reading moved
Second reading moved again
After restoration, the second reading was moved again in the Senate.
- 06 Nov 2025
Senate · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
Senators debated the bill, with Greens senators supporting divestmentTo end or dispose of a financial relationship. Under the bill, covered providers would have to end prohibited partnerships and divest prohibited investments within the relevant six-month period. and Liberal senators opposing the proposal.