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 makes a range of changes to federal crime laws. It gives police powers at Western Sydney airport, allows electronic warrant applications, extends online surveillance and disruption warrants to 2029, changes how drug quantities are measured, lets a senior officer act for the Director of Public Prosecutions when there is a conflict of interest, and updates extradition arrest powers. The Senate debate focused on the drug changes, the surveillance warrant extension, and the new conflict-of-interest process.
Arguments made in support
The Government said the changes modernise and streamline crime laws so police and prosecutors can work efficiently while keeping safeguards.
Government members said counting the whole weight of a drug mixture matches state practice and stops gangs using cutting agents to fall under thresholds.
The Government said a single chain-of-custody certificate saves police time, and defendants can still challenge the evidence in court.
The Coalition supported extending the surveillance warrants, saying the security monitor found them effective against serious online crime.
The Government said letting a senior officer act when the DPP has a conflict is more efficient than the DPP taking leave.
Arguments made against, or for changes
The Greens opposed the drug measuring and evidence certificate changes, citing legal aid concerns that they would mostly affect low-level couriers.
The Greens moved to end the surveillance warrants in 2027, saying safeguards recommended by the security monitor should come first. The Coalition and Government opposed this.
The Coalition wanted the removal of the crime intelligence agency's data disruption power considered in a separate bill, and won a review of the new extradition powers.
Coalition senators asked whether the DPP change related to a current war crimes prosecution, and raised concerns about the Attorney-General choosing the substitute. The Government said it did not.
One Nation, backed by the Coalition, moved to restore an earlier legal definition used in war crimes law, saying a 2024 change was unfair to veterans.
243 speeches by 22 members in the House and Senate over 8 sitting days.
Hansard: House of Representatives, 11 Mar 2026 ›
The official Hansard (PDF), Parliament of Australia
Hansard: House of Representatives, 25 Mar 2026 ›
The official Hansard (PDF), Parliament of Australia
Hansard: Senate, 11 Aug 2026 ›
The official Hansard (PDF), Parliament of Australia
Hansard: Senate, 12 Aug 2026 ›
The official Hansard (PDF), Parliament of Australia
Hansard: Senate, 13 Aug 2026 ›
The official Hansard (PDF), Parliament of Australia
Hansard: Senate, 17 Aug 2026 ›
The official Hansard (PDF), Parliament of Australia
Hansard: House of Representatives, 20 Aug 2026 ›
The official Hansard (PDF), Parliament of Australia
Hansard: Senate, 20 Aug 2026 ›
The official Hansard (PDF), Parliament of Australia
Every party member who voted went with the majority of their party.