Bills — Secrecy Provisions Amendment (Repealing Offences) Bill 2026; Consideration in Detail

House of Representatives · 14 May 2026 · 10:56
Not passed by a large majority
9
Yes (ayes)
69
No (noes)
The question is that the amendment be agreed to.

See it for yourself

This vote was on this bill. Read the official text:
Official Hansard record (PDF) ›
House of Representatives, 14 May 2026. The division is at 10:56. Parliament of Australia
Official documents from aph.gov.au and legislation.gov.au, checked 21 October 2026.

What was debated in Parliament

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 removes criminal penalties from more than 300 Commonwealth secrecy rules, so most breaches become civil or workplace matters instead. It creates a new, narrower offence for misusing government information for personal gain or to cause harm, and requires the Attorney-General's consent before a journalist can be prosecuted for a secrecy offence. The debate focused on how the new offence is worded, the journalist consent rule and whistleblower protections.
Arguments made in support
The government said many secrecy offences were outdated or too broad, and criminal law should be kept for serious cases.
Government members said the new offence closes a gap exposed when a former PwC partner allegedly shared confidential government information.
Supporters said making the Attorney-General's consent a law, not just a direction, gives journalists a stronger safeguard.
Crossbench members welcomed the bill as a major step, and the Coalition said it would not oppose it in the House.
Arguments made against, or for changes
The Coalition and crossbench members said the word 'improper' in the new offence is not defined, leaving people unsure what is a crime.
The Coalition said the new offence may not cover leaks made for political reasons with no personal gain, and raised gaps for former officials.
The Coalition said the journalist consent rule was much wider than any review recommended. Crossbench members said it gives a politician power over prosecutions.
Kate Chaney moved amendments for a harm-based test and five-yearly reviews. Allegra Spender moved one to protect whistleblowers. The government opposed both.
Andrew Wilkie moved a motion calling for stronger whistleblower laws and a whistleblower protection authority. The government opposed it.
23 speeches by 14 members in the House over 4 sitting days.
Hansard: House of Representatives, 1 Apr 2026 ›
The official Hansard (PDF), Parliament of Australia
Hansard: House of Representatives, 12 May 2026 ›
The official Hansard (PDF), Parliament of Australia
Hansard: House of Representatives, 13 May 2026 ›
The official Hansard (PDF), Parliament of Australia
Hansard: House of Representatives, 14 May 2026 ›
The official Hansard (PDF), Parliament of Australia

How each party voted

Labor
0 Yes
68 No
26–
Independent
8 Yes
0 No
2–
Liberal
0 Yes
1 No
16–
Greens
1 Yes
0 No
LNP
0 Yes
0 No
16–
Nationals
0 Yes
0 No
8–
One Nation
0 Yes
0 No
2–
Katter
0 Yes
0 No
1–
Centre Alliance
0 Yes
0 No
1–
The last column counts members who did not vote. Party counts are for current members.

No rebels

Every party member who voted went with the majority of their party.
Source: Hansard, House of Representatives, 14 May 2026
Parliament of Australia, via OpenAustralia Foundation · checked 14 October 2026