Sex Discrimination Amendment (Restoring Biological Definitions)
Current status
This bill did not become law and is no longer proceeding.
Policy area
Law, justice & rights
What does this bill do?
The local APH metadata records this as a private billA bill introduced by a senator who is not introducing it as a government minister. The APH metadata records this bill's type as Private. originating in the Senate, sponsored by Senators Alex Antic and Matthew Canavan.
Why was it introduced?
The supplied local sources do not include a second-reading speech, explanatory memorandum, official summary or bill text explaining why the sponsors introduced the bill. The verified record only shows that Senators Alex Antic and Matthew Canavan sponsored a private Senate bill with this title, that it was introduced on 31 July 2025, and that the Senate defeated the first-reading question on the same day.
Broader context
The local source set is too limited to give a broader policy history for this bill. It supports only a narrow parliamentary timeline: a private Senate bill sponsored by Senators Alex Antic and Matthew Canavan was introduced on 31 July 2025, then stopped when the Senate defeated the first-reading question later that day.
Key criticism
The supplied local sources do not record speeches, an explanatory memorandum or public-context material setting out arguments against the bill. The Senate divisionA counted parliamentary vote that records how senators voted. The collected division for this bill recorded 25 ayes and 36 noes. shows that a majority voted no on the first-reading question, but the local source set does not provide their reasons.
Who supported it?
Senators Alex Antic and Matthew Canavan introduced this bill. It was supported by Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, UAP, some crossbench members; opposed by Labor, Greens, some crossbench members; and did not pass.
Did it become law?
No
The bill did not complete passage through Parliament.
Final passage
Did not pass
1 recorded vote before the bill stopped proceeding
Time before failure
Same day
From introduction to the final recorded step before the bill stopped proceeding
Meaning
What does this bill do?
-
The local APH metadata records this as a private billA bill introduced by a senator who is not introducing it as a government minister. The APH metadata records this bill's type as Private. originating in the Senate, sponsored by Senators Alex Antic and Matthew Canavan.
-
The local source bundle does not include bill text, an explanatory memorandum, passed text, an official summary or speeches, so this page does not describe the bill's proposed legal changes.
-
The APH timeline records the bill as introduced on 31 July 2025, then records the first readingAn early formal stage for a bill in a chamber. In this case, the Senate defeated the first-reading question, so the bill did not proceed. as negatived on the same day.
-
The Senate divided on the first-reading question and defeated it 36 noes to 25 ayes, with six pairsA parliamentary pairing arrangement records senators absent from opposite sides so their absence does not change the result. The collected division lists six pairs. and an 11-vote majority, so the bill did not proceed.
Show source excerpts
-
Type: Private; Sponsor(s): ANTIC, Sen AlexCANAVAN, Sen Matthew; Originating house: Senate; Status: Not Proceeding; Parliament no: 48
APH bill metadata -
introducedText: ""; passedText: ""; explanatoryMemoText: ""; officialSummary: ""; ministerSecondReadingSystemId: null
Local source coverage -
Introduced - 31 Jul 2025; First reading negatived - 31 Jul 2025
APH bill timeline -
DIVISION:NOES 36 (11 majority) AYES 25 PAIRS 6 ... Question negatived.
Senate division, 31 July 2025
Context
Broader context for this bill
The local source set is too limited to give a broader policy history for this bill. It supports only a narrow parliamentary timeline: a private Senate bill sponsored by Senators Alex Antic and Matthew Canavan was introduced on 31 July 2025, then stopped when the Senate defeated the first-reading question later that day.
- 31 July 2025
Antic and Canavan sponsor private Senate bill
APH metadata records the bill as a private billA bill introduced by a senator who is not introducing it as a government minister. The APH metadata records this bill's type as Private. originating in the Senate, with Senators Alex Antic and Matthew Canavan listed as sponsors.
Parliament of Australia ↗ - 31 July 2025
Senate defeats first-reading question
The Senate divisionA counted parliamentary vote that records how senators voted. The collected division for this bill recorded 25 ayes and 36 noes. record says the first-reading question was negatived 36 noes to 25 ayes, with six pairsA parliamentary pairing arrangement records senators absent from opposite sides so their absence does not change the result. The collected division lists six pairs., leaving the APH status as Not ProceedingThe status shown in APH metadata for this bill after the Senate defeated the first-reading question..
Senate Hansard division ↗
Legislative route
How did it move through Parliament?
Introduced in the Senate 31 July 2025
The APH record says the private senators' billA bill introduced by a senator who is not introducing it as a government minister. The APH metadata records this bill's type as Private. was introduced in the Senate.
Introduced
First readingAn early formal stage for a bill in a chamber. In this case, the Senate defeated the first-reading question, so the bill did not proceed. defeated 31 July 2025
The Senate defeated the first-reading question, so the bill did not proceed beyond introduction.
First readingAn early formal stage for a bill in a chamber. In this case, the Senate defeated the first-reading question, so the bill did not proceed. negatived
Key criticism
The main case against this bill
The supplied local sources do not record speeches, an explanatory memorandum or public-context material setting out arguments against the bill. The Senate divisionA counted parliamentary vote that records how senators voted. The collected division for this bill recorded 25 ayes and 36 noes. shows that a majority voted no on the first-reading question, but the local source set does not provide their reasons.
This page treats the divisionA counted parliamentary vote that records how senators voted. The collected division for this bill recorded 25 ayes and 36 noes. result as a verified parliamentary outcome, not as evidence of any senator's policy reasoning.
Further sources
Votes
Recorded votes
How the bill itself passed
These were the main recorded votes on the bill.
Defeated Start Senate consideration of biological definitions bill
Defeated 25 to 36. Support came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, UAP, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents.
Start Senate consideration of biological definitions bill
These are votes on the bill itself rather than amendment votes.
Parliamentary debate
Who spoke, and what they said
No speeches were found for this bill.
Record
Full record
- Status
- Not Proceeding -- Collected from the APH bill page.
- Originating house
- Senate
- Bill type
- Private senators' bill -- APH metadata records the bill type as Private and lists Senators Alex Antic and Matthew Canavan as sponsors.
- Final recorded stage
- First reading defeated -- The APH timeline records first reading negatived on 31 July 2025.
- Recorded division
- Noes 36, ayes 25 -- The Senate division record also lists six pairs and an 11-vote majority.
- Source coverage
- Limited -- The local sources include APH metadata, the APH timeline and a Senate first-reading division, but no bill text, explanatory memorandum, passed text or speeches.
- 31 July 2025
Senate · Introduced
Introduced in the Senate
The APH record says the private senators' billA bill introduced by a senator who is not introducing it as a government minister. The APH metadata records this bill's type as Private. was introduced in the Senate.
- 31 July 2025
Senate · First reading negatived
First readingAn early formal stage for a bill in a chamber. In this case, the Senate defeated the first-reading question, so the bill did not proceed. defeated
The Senate defeated the first-reading question, so the bill did not proceed beyond introduction.