What was debated: Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence) Bill 2025
Summarised using AI from the official Hansard transcript of the debate only. It is not a record of the debate and may leave things out. Read the Hansard below to check it.
This bill sets up a national code that all universities and higher education providers must follow to prevent and respond to gender-based violence. It includes rules for student housing, a ban on most non-disclosure agreements, and a new enforcement branch in the Department of Education. The transcript includes only the Education Minister's introduction speech.
Arguments made in support
The Education Minister said surveys show one in 20 students reported being sexually assaulted on campus and many felt unheard when they complained.
He said the code would make all providers meet the same high standards, with vice-chancellors directly accountable and reporting every six months.
The Government said universities could no longer leave disclosures to private colleges and would have to investigate reports involving their students or staff.
The minister said the code was shaped by wide consultation with victim-survivors, students, experts, the sector and state governments.
The Government said strong powers, civil penalties and yearly public reporting would build a culture of compliance.
1 speech by 1 member in the House over 1 sitting day.
Hansard: House of Representatives, 25 Aug 2025 ›
The official Hansard (PDF), Parliament of Australia
What was debated: Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence) (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2025
Summarised using AI from the official Hansard transcript of the debate only. It is not a record of the debate and may leave things out. Read the Hansard below to check it.
This bill makes the related legal changes for a new national code on gender-based violence at universities, including making compliance with the code a condition for approved higher education providers. It was debated together with the main bill, which lets the Education Minister set the code and creates a new enforcement unit in the Department of Education. All parties supported the bills, while the debate also covered who should enforce the code and whether a similar code was needed for antisemitism.
Arguments made in support
Members across parties cited surveys showing one in 20 students reported sexual assault and many felt unheard when they complained.
Government members said the code makes vice-chancellors accountable, bans most non-disclosure agreements and covers student housing run by private colleges.
Supporters said universities and the existing regulator had failed to act, so enforceable national standards with penalties were needed.
The Greens, independents and Coalition speakers praised advocates and survivors whose campaigning led to the reform.
Arguments made against, or for changes
Coalition speakers said putting the regulator inside the Education Department, not the independent regulator TEQSA, risks politicising enforcement.
Coalition senators and Kate Chaney questioned leaving the code's detail to the minister, as a Senate committee had noted.
Kate Chaney and Zali Steggall said universities and smaller student housing providers need more funding, guidance and clear rules to comply.
The Coalition moved an amendment calling for a similar code on antisemitism, which Allegra Spender supported. The Government and Greens did not support it.
46 speeches by 35 members in the Senate and House over 5 sitting days.
Hansard: Senate, 23 July 2025 ›
The official Hansard (PDF), Parliament of Australia
Hansard: Senate, 28 July 2025 ›
The official Hansard (PDF), Parliament of Australia
Hansard: Senate, 29 July 2025 ›
The official Hansard (PDF), Parliament of Australia
Hansard: Senate, 31 July 2025 ›
The official Hansard (PDF), Parliament of Australia
Hansard: House of Representatives, 25 Aug 2025 ›
The official Hansard (PDF), Parliament of Australia
The last column counts members who did not vote. Party counts are for current members.
1 vote was cast by people who have since left Parliament.
Every party member who voted went with the majority of their party.