The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Sue Lines ) took the chair at 09:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.
Defence Amendment (Sexual Assault Prevention, Intervention and Response Commission) Bill 2025
Unreported abuse is a silent disaster for victims and for the ADF.
An accurate picture of the extent of sexually based unacceptable behaviour cannot be gained.
That the Senate take note of the explanation.
I do not accept the conclusion that officials are failing in their duties if they give evidence to a committee based on advice provided to them that, at face value, can be accepted as accurate.
The representations made by officials were based on information available to them at the time and were honestly and reasonably held.
That the Senate take note of the explanation.
Whatever view is taken of the political controversy surrounding the distribution of funding, the Centre's concern is a systemic one. More than half a billion dollars of public money was allocated through a closed, non-competitive process, without a publicly explained basis for why that process was used or how projects were selected. We will continue to ask the questions that matter: why was a closed process chosen; how were projects selected for invitation; and are the rules governing Commonwealth grants strong enough to ensure public money is allocated transparently …
That the Senate take note of the explanation.
… we will act in a manner that is consistent with the highest ethical standards … I expect my Ministers to demonstrate that they are complying with these high standards …
The Code of Conduct for Ministers sets out, in clear terms, the expectations the Albanese Government has of all its ministers.
Ministers are personally responsible for the management and declaration of their private interests, the identification and declaration of any current or potential conflicts of interest …
Ministers must declare and register their personal interests …
Aged Care Legislation Amendment (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Aged Care Commissioner and Other Measures) Bill 2026
We see this review pathway as a useful interim safeguard, and we welcome the ability for those assessments that are found to not meet the needs of the older person to be reviewed relatively quickly.
OPAN welcomes the proposed escalation pathway. It's an important interim reform to enable human correction of outcomes informed by the integrated assessment tool.
We have called for this sort of escalation pathway since the commencement of the Aged Care Act in 2024. Older people need an accessible correction mechanism while this longer-term reform goes on to address other concerns around the IT, including how it picks up dementia.
Unless the Government is prepared to acknowledge that the algorithm has failed and set out a clear plan to correct it, Coalition Senators are not willing to support a measure that treats only the symptom. Doing so risks entrenching a flawed system and relieving pressure on the Government to undertake the fundamental reform that is required.
That the question be now put.
The Senate divided. [12:01]
(The Acting Deputy President—Senator Sharma)
Auditors' procedures often did not sufficiently address the valuation risks associated with unlisted investments and were not adequate to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence.
For externally managed investments, three auditors did not adequately test the reliability of prices provided by external fund managers, or test the methods, assumptions and data used for the valuations.
For internally managed investments, two auditors did not obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence for the valuations.
One auditor had insufficient audit documentation of the explanations and supporting evidence for valuation differences.
we had findings relating to the audit of unlisted investment valuations for three (two from EY and one from PwC).
… … …
The findings relate to $80 billion of unlisted investments, which is 29% of the $275 billion of investments covered by our six RSE audit surveillances.
Have you ever realised how bushfires are getting bigger, floods are becoming more frequent, and we are slowly losing our wildlife?
For me, the main issue impacting our future is climate change.
This issue is close to my heart. I have grown up in a world where I have heard about climate change, but only as I got older did I realise how much it could impact my future. I wonder whether the environment I know today will ever be the same.
More than 700 species face extinction from climate change.
And we aren't helping.
Australia is responsible for 1% to 1.3% of global greenhouse gas emissions, equal to 437.5 million tonnes, or 14 to 15 tonnes per person.
When we account for fossil fuels we export, such as coal and gas, our contribution rises to around 4.5% to 5% of global emissions, or 1.7 billion tonnes.
Surely this is something we can decrease.
If we don't take action, the future looks grim. Young people can feel powerless about the future. But we can slow climate change by setting stronger climate goals and taking action.
Together, we can protect our future.
My name is Klara, and I am part of a generation trying to plan a future that feels more out of reach every day. Right now, the cost of living is rising faster than we can keep up. Groceries cost more.
Transport costs more. Even basic things feel harder to afford.
For young people, this doesn't just mean cutting back. It means missing out. It means more stress at home. It means fewer chances to feel independent in the future. At the same time, housing feels impossible. Renting is unstable and expensive. Owning a home feels like something that might never happen. We are being asked to work hard for a future we can't clearly see.
These issues are connected. If we can't afford to live now, how can we build a future later? I want a future where young people can afford the basics and have a fair chance at a stable home.
Parliament must act by lowering the cost of essentials, investing in more affordable and social housing, and making renting fairer and more secure for young people. Because right now, we are not just struggling to live. We are struggling to believe in what comes next.
Shaping young people's future is the price of living. For many people cannot afford a house. Because 82% of people can't afford to buy a house in Melbourne.
It makes me so worried that so many people are struggling just to have a roof over their head.
In the lead up to this current crisis factors like severe shortage of new housing supply are very low.
In 2014, the average house in Melbourne cost $615,000 but now it costs $1,030,000! That is almost two times more expensive!
Because houses cost way too much, families are forced into a terrible choice: they must sacrifice buying essential things like food so they can pay for their home.
It is really scary to think that by the time it is 2040 a house could cost around two million dollars.
Together we can shape this future!
We can make prices go down by building a lot more houses so there are enough for everyone.
We need to take action so when children are older they can turn their dream of owning a house into a reality.
That's why we need to take action now … and make housing cheaper.!
Have you ever really thought about gender equality? We love to talk about the 'fair go' in this country, but the truth is, we aren't delivering it equally yet.
Look at the facts. The average Australian woman still takes home less pay than a man for doing the exact same job. On top of that, women still shoulder the vast majority of unpaid childcare and housework. That is not a fair go; that is an old-fashioned system holding us back.
This isn't about pitting men against women. True equality lifts all of us up. It means a young girl growing up in Australia can aim for the top job without a second thought. It also means a dad can take time off work to be with his newborn baby without worrying about what his mates or boss might think.
Fixing this doesn't just make social sense, it makes economical sense. We need to modernise our workplaces, support working parents and close that stubborn pay gap for good. Let's work together to build an Australia where your gender never decides your pay-cheque or potential.
Walawaani yanz ngai narri Alarah Dhurga Yuin.
You've probably never heard that sentence before. It means: Hello everybody, my name is Alarah and I am from the Yuin tribe.
If you've never heard that language before, there's a good chance you've never heard of my tribe either.
And that's the problem.
Before colonisation, over 250 Indigenous languages were spoken across this continent. Today, only around 60 remain. And if we do nothing, more languages and traditions could disappear forever.
Schools are meant to prepare students for the future, but culture is part of that future too. Culture is not just history it's identity, belonging, language, and connection. It's who we are.
This issue matters to me personally because I grew up without being able to fully learn about my own culture. I had to search for answers myself, and I'm not the only one. Nearly 79% of First Nations children do not have access to Indigenous language programs at school.
But this can change.
Schools could introduce Indigenous language classes, cultural clubs, and stronger connections with First Nations communities. This would help non-Indigenous students build understanding, respect, and a deeper connection to this country's history, while helping Indigenous students feel proud of who they are, more connected to their identity, and empowered to keep their cultures and languages alive for future generations.
When we protect Indigenous culture, we are not only protecting the past, we are strengthening this country's future.
That the Senate take note of all answers to all questions without notice put by coalition senators today.
That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister representing the Minister for Housing (Senator Ayres) to a question without notice I asked today on the need for rent caps and for a massive new injection of investment in public housing.
There has been insufficient transparency on program delivery, costs and impact.
That the Senate take note of the answer from Minister Penny Wong on the interaction between Westport and AUKUS.
That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Home Affairs, by no later than 5 pm on Friday, 23 October 2026, copies of any documents held by the Minister for Home Affairs or his office or the Department of Home Affairs which contain modelling of the economic effects of the changes to migration settings announced by the minister at the National Press Club on 17 September 2026.
That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Education, by no later than 5 pm on Thursday, 29 October 2026, copies of documents 1 to 4, 8 to 17, 19 to 32 and 34 to 39 identified by the Department of Education in a schedule of documents provided in response to a freedom of information request with the reference 2367, relating to the Government's commitment to invest up to $5 million towards building a new child care centre at Mukinbudin.
That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Communications, by no later than 5 pm on Wednesday, 4 November 2026, copies of all documents created between 3 February and 5 March 2026, or on or after 17 August 2026, held by the Minister for Communications, her office or the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications, Sport and the Arts, which relate to order for the production of documents no. 321, agreed to by the Senate on 4 February 2026.
GENERAL BUSINESS NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 782
That there be laid on the table by the Minister for Government Services, by no later than 5 pm on Thursday, 12 November 2026, copies of all ministerial submissions, meeting notes, meeting minutes, emails and electronic or other instant messages between the minister or her office and Services Australia, created before 24 September 2026, that relate to the June 2026 incident in which an artificial intelligence agent developed by OpenAI gained unauthorised access to the Medicare statistics reporting service portal.
GENERAL BUSINESS NOTICE OF MOTION NO.783
That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Prime Minister, by no later than 5 pm on Thursday, 12 November 2026, copies of all documents created before 24 September 2026 and held by the Prime Minister or his office that relate to the June 2026 incident in which an artificial intelligence agent developed by OpenAI gained unauthorised access to the Medicare statistics reporting service portal.
That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations, by no later than 5 pm on Thursday, 5 November 2026, copies of all ministerial submissions, emails, briefing notes, meeting notes and electronic or instant messages created after 1 August 2026 between the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations or her office and the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations in relation to:
(a) stakeholder consultation on the proposed Fair Work Court; and
(b) implementation timelines for the proposed Fair Work Court.
That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Treasurer, by no later than 9 am on 15 October 2026, a copy of the Board of Taxation's Red Tape Reduction Review that was delivered to the Government on 30 June 2026.
Treasury Laws Amendment (Scrapping Scope 3) Bill 2026
That the following bill be introduced:
A Bill for an Act to amend the Corporations Act 2001 , and for related purposes.
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
I rise to speak on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Scrapping Scope 3) Bill 2026.
Australian businesses should be spending their time making things, serving customers, employing Australians and growing their businesses, not drowning in government paperwork.
But under Labor, businesses are being asked to spend thousands of dollars chasing information they don't control, from companies they may never have dealt with, just to comply with another layer of regulation.
That is not how you lift productivity. It is how you make running a business harder and more expensive.
Australia has a productivity problem. And it's a problem that has gotten worse under this Government, with productivity collapsing by almost 5% since Labor came to power.
There are many factors contributing to our productivity challenge, including:
All three make life harder for Australian businesses. They increase costs, eat into margins and make it harder for businesses to invest, expand and employ more people.
But there is an important difference.
Governments may not control every factor driving business costs, but they do control the rules they impose on businesses.
And when those rules become unnecessarily complex, costly and burdensome, government has a responsibility to do something about it.
Yet under Labor, the regulatory burden continues to grow.
Research commissioned by the Australian Institute of Company Directors found that the cost of complying with Commonwealth regulation rose from $65 billion in 2013 to $160 billion in 2024.
That is more than double in just over a decade.
Think about what that money represents. It is money that could be spent on new equipment, extra staff, better technology or expanding a business. Instead, too much of it is being swallowed up by compliance.
Businesses do not need more forms to fill out or more consultants to pay. They need room to get on with the job.
Of course, sensible regulation has a place. It should protect people, provide certainty and serve a clear purpose. But when the costs and complexity outweigh the practical benefits, it is time to change the rules.
Australia will never regulate its way to prosperity.
Of course, good regulation has a purpose. It protects consumers, supports functioning markets and provides certainty. But regulation must also be proportionate, practical and deliver benefits that justify its costs.
When compliance obligations become unnecessarily complex or expensive, it is businesses and their customers who ultimately bear the burden.
What is most troubling is that the Treasurer, Jim Chalmers, knows how serious Australia's productivity problem is.
Earlier this year, he said:
"If Australia's productivity trajectory remains on its current course, working weeks will be 5 per cent longer and incomes will be 40 per cent lower in 2063 than would have been the case if productivity increased at its long-run average."
The Treasurer understands the stakes. But recognising the problem is not enough. The Government must be prepared to tackle the barriers holding Australian businesses back.
Reducing unnecessary red tape is one practical step the Government can take right now.
This Bill is a clear example of how that burden can be reduced.
It addresses two issues within Australia's mandatory sustainability reporting framework: the requirement to report Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions and the application of mandatory sustainability reporting to Group 3 entities.
Scope 3 emissions are indirect emissions generated across a business's supply chain. They can include emissions from suppliers, transport, the materials used to make a product and even the way customers use that product.
The problem is that businesses are being asked to calculate emissions generated by other people, often using information they cannot readily access or verify.
Take a refrigerator manufacturer.
To calculate its Scope 3 emissions, it could need information about the steel used in the fridge, the plastics, the compressor, the electronic components, the packaging and the transport.
But it may not be enough to know what those suppliers themselves emit. It could also need information about the businesses supplying the steel, the plastics, the components and the packaging.
The steel supplier has its own suppliers. The plastics manufacturer relies on chemical producers. The component makers have their own factories, materials and transport networks.
Before long, a business could be chasing emissions data from a supplier's supplier's supplier and still not have the full picture.
That is the practical problem with mandatory Scope 3 reporting. Businesses can be left spending significant time and money trying to assemble data they do not control and cannot reliably obtain.
The Coalition has consistently raised concerns about whether the costs and complexity of these requirements are proportionate to the practical benefits they deliver.
Labor's own Treasury estimated that Scope 3 emissions modelling alone could cost around $245,000 per entity in the first year, followed by $161,700 annually.
Those are enormous sums to spend on modelling emissions across a supply chain, particularly when businesses are already dealing with high operating costs and the challenge of lifting productivity.
The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry has also raised concerns about the administrative burden, complexity and legal and reputational risks associated with Scope 3 reporting.
As ACCI chief executive Andrew McKellar said:
"Reporting Scope 3 emissions creates significant compliance costs and administrative burdens that flow through supply chains and traps small businesses in a regulatory nightmare."
And that is precisely the problem: the burden does not stop with the businesses directly subject to mandatory reporting.
Large businesses required to report Scope 3 emissions may seek information from smaller suppliers to calculate their own emissions. Those suppliers may lack the resources, systems or expertise needed to provide detailed emissions data.
As a result, reporting obligations imposed on large businesses can flow down through supply chains, placing additional pressure on small and medium-sized enterprises that are not themselves required to report. Smaller businesses may face additional costs to meet the demands of larger customers, with potential commercial consequences if they cannot provide the requested information.
ACCI have also warned:
"Many small businesses will be expected to provide complex emissions data, despite having little ability to measure it accurately and no clear evidence that the additional reporting will lead to better environmental outcomes."
The Coalition Senators' dissenting report on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Financial Market Infrastructure and Other Measures) Bill 2024 highlighted these concerns, including the significant data and methodology gaps associated with Scope 3 emissions and the potential for compliance costs to be passed on to smaller suppliers.
The United States Securities and Exchange Commission also identified concerns about the costs, reliability and collection of Scope 3 emissions information when developing its climate disclosure rules.
These concerns demonstrate why the practical operation of reporting requirements matters. A reporting obligation should not impose substantial costs on businesses simply because information is theoretically desirable, particularly where that information is difficult to obtain and the benefits are uncertain.
These costs are not limited to Scope 3 reporting. The Bill also removes Group 3 entities from the mandatory sustainability reporting regime by raising the relevant reporting thresholds.
The costs of compliance are particularly significant for these businesses.
Evidence cited in the Coalition's dissenting report estimated first-year implementation costs for Group 3 entities of between $30,000 and $70,000, with ongoing reporting costs of between $20,000 and $40,000 per year, before additional assurance costs.
For many businesses, those are significant sums to spend on a new reporting regime, particularly when resources could otherwise be directed towards employees, equipment, expansion and day-to-day operations.
The dissenting report also cited Treasury's estimate that only 5 per cent of Group 3 companies would have material climate risks requiring disclosure.
That raises a legitimate question about proportionality. Where businesses must undertake substantial work to assess their climate risks, prepare reports and obtain assurance, even when they ultimately have little material information to disclose, the costs can be difficult to justify.
The issue is not whether businesses should understand the risks relevant to their operations. It is whether every business captured by the regime should face the same mandatory reporting framework regardless of its size, resources and circumstances.
The removal of Group 3 entities recognises that regulatory obligations should be proportionate to the businesses required to meet them.
For small businesses in particular, compliance costs can be difficult to absorb. Larger businesses may have dedicated legal, finance and compliance teams. Smaller operators often have to manage these obligations alongside running their business and serving their customers.
The Coalition is not the only ones making the case for reform.
The Australian Institute of Company Directors has also identified the removal of Group 3 entities from climate reporting as a practical reform that could make a meaningful difference to Australia's productivity.
In its report, The Stagnant Nation: Lifting Australia's Dynamism , the AICD recommended removing Group 3 entities from the climate reporting regime. It estimated that doing so would benefit approximately 3,000 organisations and deliver savings of $2 billion over four years.
That is a substantial reduction in compliance costs for Australian businesses, and a clear example of how targeted deregulation can free up resources for more productive uses.
The case for this Bill is straightforward.
Australian businesses should be focused on producing goods, serving customers, employing Australians and finding ways to grow, not spending hundreds of thousands of dollars chasing emissions data they cannot reliably obtain.
This Bill removes mandatory Scope 3 emissions reporting and removes Group 3 entities from mandatory sustainability reporting. It is a practical step towards reducing unnecessary compliance costs and freeing up resources for more productive uses.
It does not prevent businesses from measuring or voluntarily reporting their emissions. Nor does it tell businesses to ignore risks relevant to their operations.
It simply recognises that regulation must be practical, proportionate and worth the cost.
At a time when Australia needs stronger productivity growth, we should be making it easier for businesses to invest, employ and grow, not adding more paperwork and expense.
The Coalition will cut the red tape holding Australian businesses back, so they can spend less time complying with government rules and more time getting on with the job.
I commend the Bill to the Senate.
GENERAL BUSINESS NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 791
That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Home Affairs, by no later than midday on Thursday, 22 October 2026, the following documents relating to changes announced, made or proposed during 2026 to the Working Holiday Maker program:
(a) the final version of any document recording the minister's decision or approval to:
(i) introduce or alter a numerical limit, ballot or other allocation mechanism affecting second or third Working Holiday (subclass 417) or Work and Holiday (subclass 462) visas,
(ii) alter eligibility for a second or third such visa, or
(iii) alter the processing priority or anticipated processing times for such visas;
(b) the final document setting out the methodology or calculation used to determine any numerical limit or allocation applying to second or third Working Holiday Maker visas;
(c) the final implementation plan, operational instruction or departmental direction giving effect to any matter referred to in paragraph (a);
(d) the final departmental estimate or assessment of:
(i) the number of visa applications and visa grants affected,
(ii) anticipated processing times,
(iii) the number of current or prospective visa holders affected, and
(iv) the commencement and transitional arrangements applying to applications already lodged or persons undertaking specified work; and
(e) all attachments to the documents referred to in paragraphs (a) to (d).
GENERAL BUSINESS NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 792
That there be laid on the table by the Minister for the Environment and Water, by no later than midday on Thursday, 22 October 2026:
(a) the final ministerial brief provided by the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water to the minister concerning the Murray-Darling Basin Authority's 2026 draft reconciliation of the Sustainable Diversion Limit Adjustment Mechanism; and
(b) any final ministerial brief provided by the department to the minister concerning options to address the projected shortfall identified in that reconciliation, including any option involving the purchase of permanent water entitlements, together with attachments to the documents referred to above.
GENERAL BUSINESS NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 793
That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, by midday on Thursday, 22 October 2026:
(a) the final ministerial briefs and written advice provided by the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry to the Minister concerning the detection, establishment, spread, or management of Monosporascus cannonballus in Australia; and
(b) all attachments to the documents referred to in paragraph (a).
(1) That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Home Affairs, by no later than midday on Wednesday, 21 October 2026, the following documents:
(a) every version of each ministerial brief or submission provided by the Department of Home Affairs to the Minister for Home Affairs and Minister for Immigration and Citizenship, or the minister's office, between 1 May 2026 and the date of this order concerning the development, making, approval or signature of either of the following:
(i) Ministerial Direction 119, and
(ii) Ministerial Direction 117; and
(b) all attachments provided with each version of a brief or submission referred to in paragraph (a).
(2) For the avoidance of doubt, this order does not extend to correspondence or internal departmental drafts or working documents that were not provided to the minister or the minister's office.
Protecting Australia's Defence Heritage Bill 2026
That the following bill be introduced: A Bill for an Act to amend the Lands Acquisition Act 1989 , and for related purposes.
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
Our military heritage belongs to all Australians.
It belongs to the ANZACs.
It belongs to our veterans alive today.
It is not the plaything of a political party.
But right now, the Albanese government plans to sell off our priceless military history.
And technically, there is nothing stopping them from doing so.
They don't have to put it to the Australian people.
They don't have to pass a bill through the other place or here.
They can unilaterally dispose of military sites around Australia which have served the ADF and Australia stretching back even before federation.
That's an oversight. And it needs to change.
This Bill seeks to do that.
This Bill recognises that our military history is an inheritance that belongs to all Australians, and that the government of the day of any party should not be able to sell it off without parliamentary oversight.
On 28 August 2023, the Defence Ministers announced the appointment of two co-leads for the Defence Estate Audit.
The Defence Estate Audit was delivered to the Australian Government on 22 December 2023 and on 4 February 2026, a public version of the audit report was released, together with the government's response to its 20 recommendations.
The Defence Department was directed to divest 67 Defence sites: full divestment of 64 sites, partial divestment of three sites.
So why is this happening?
Not because of strategy. Because of a few bucks.
The only reason this sell off is occurring is that the Albanese government refuses to fund Defence properly.
Having squeezed the Defence budget, Labor is now selling the family silver to plug the gap—and treating our military history and heritage like line items on a spreadsheet.
Even the arithmetic does not hold up.
The government promises a net $1.8 billion after relocation and remediation costs, but Defence and Finance officials have made it clear in Senate Estimates that these are very indicative estimates only.
There is no guarantee this fire sale will net any proceeds once remediation and heritage constraints are completely factored in.
What is left is likely to be a pittance in return for a priceless legacy.
And look at what we are being asked to give up.
Victoria Barracks Melbourne, where the War Cabinet sat and where Prime Ministers Menzies and Curtin made the decisions that shaped the fate of our nation.
Victoria Barracks Sydney, built from Hawkesbury sandstone, in continuous military use for 185 years, and home to Forces Command for generations. It holds one of the most important collections of Georgian military buildings in Australia.
Lancer Barracks, completed in 1820 on Governor Macquarie's orders, is the oldest continuously used military barracks on the Australian mainland. Lancer Barracks has a parade ground where the ashes of fallen soldiers have been scattered, where the Albanese government would be happy for apartment towers to be built on top.
Fort Queenscliff, which has stood guard over the entrance to Port Phillip Bay since 1860—one of the largest and best-preserved coastal artillery forts in the country.
HMAS Penguin on Middle Head, commissioned in 1942, still home to around 350 personnel and the Navy's centre for diver training and underwater medicine.
These are not old wine cellars. They are irreplaceable pieces of our national story.
But this is about more than history; it is also about our current and future capability.
In the current strategic environment, we must behave as though we are in a pre-conflict world.
Serving and former Defence personnel have warned of the serious risks to our preparedness if this mass divestment program goes ahead.
When world leaders came to Sydney for APEC in 2007, it was Victoria Barracks that was chosen to stage our special forces and counter-terrorism capability.
Sell it, and we will never get it back.
The same is true for Defence sites across the country.
HMAS Cerberus in Victoria, is a critical ongoing naval training facility where the government plans to flog off so much land around the base it could affect the firing range and the storage of explosives.
In Western Australia, Leeuwin and Irwin Barracks together house all three branches of service.
Irwin Barracks is the Army's main Army Reserve site in Western Australia. It is a critical base for our Reservists, more than 1,000 of whom will be asked to drive up to 50 minutes in traffic to another base to continue serving the ADF.
We should not be doing anything to make service in the Reserves harder for ordinary Australians juggling their service with work and family.
That is why I am introducing the Protecting Australia's Defence Heritage Bill 2026 today. .
The object of this Private Senator's Bill is to provide parliamentary oversight of Government decisions to dispose of certain Defence estate assets used by the Australian Defence Force (ADF) or the Department of Defence (the Department).
It would be left to the Parliament to determine, on a case-by-case basis, whether a disposal decision of defence estate land should be disallowed, particularly where the disposal would be detrimental to Australia's national security or strategic capabilities.
This Bill recognises that our Defence heritage belongs to all Australians, and that the Executive Government should not be able to unilaterally sell it off without Parliamentary oversight.
The Bill would amend the Lands Acquisition Act 1989 to prohibit certain disposals of freehold interests and significant leases held by Defence in land used by the ADF or the Department of Defence, unless the land has been specified in a legislative instrument ('disposal instrument') by the Finance Minister.
.If a disposal instrument is made, the Bill would also require the Minister for Defence to table a statement in Parliament setting out why the Minister is satisfied that the disposal would be in the national interest.
The disposal instrument would be subject to disallowance, therefore creating a new mechanism for parliamentary oversight of divestments in the Defence estate.
The Bill will give effect to the recommendations of the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee inquiry into the Management of Defence Estate Assets, which called for new legislative powers to oversee divestments of Defence estate assets, and I thank my colleague Senator Collins for her work engaging with communities around the country to deliver those recommendations.
The Minister for Defence, Richard Marles, has said about Victoria Barracks, Sydney, that it was not his priority "to see defence manage the oldest wine cellar in Australia."
Then he dismissed his critics as "a few former generals who liked hanging out there."
Veterans across this country heard these statements for what they were. Contempt.
Contempt for former Generals who have led our Army for decades.
Contempt for the thousands of Australian servicemen and women, of all ranks, who have served this nation at Victoria Barracks, Sydney, for over a century.
And while I am sure there are a few eminent, retired Generals amongst those who have signed my petition to end the Albanese Government's Defence heritage fire sale, that doesn't add up to 108,000 and counting.
That is the number of Australians who have signed my petition to stop this government's reckless fire sale of irreplaceable Defence sites.
Many are members of the defence community or their families, serving and ex-serving.
Still more are everyday Australians who are outraged at this travesty and want to see their endowment preserved.
They are in good company.
Last week, General Sir Peter Cosgrove, former Chief of the Defence Force, former Governor-General, the commander who led our forces into East Timor, joined this fight.
When the Defence Minister likened Victoria Barracks to an old wine cellar, Sir Peter called it "the most stupid thing I've ever heard."
Sir Peter does not enter the fray very often, and his words hold much more weight as a result.
The RSL calls Victoria Barracks Sydney the spiritual home of the Australian Army, and an irreplaceable national asset.
RSL Australia's national president, Peter Tinley, a man who served seventeen years in the SAS, has urged the government to take a breath, because once these sites are gone, they are gone forever.
And this is not a partisan issue.
The Labor Premier of New South Wales opposes the sale of Victoria Barracks Sydney
Independents and Greens have spoken against the sale. Last month, a Senate inquiry recommended the whole scheme be immediately halted.
The community has spoken. Veterans have spoken. The Senate has spoken. The Albanese Government, and its Defence Minister Richard Marles, refuses to listen.
Which is why Parliament needs the power to stop these sales.
Otherwise, once these invaluable pieces of our military heritage are sold, they will be gone forever.
I commend the bill to the Senate.
Freedom of Information and Other Legislation Amendment (Stop the Financial Coercion) Bill 2026
That the following bill be introduced: A Bill for an Act to amend the Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 and theFreedom of Information Act 1982 , and for related purposes.
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
This Bill will address a worrying trend across Commonwealth Departments that the Government has failed to address. If this trend is allowed to continue it will undermine the intent of the Commonwealth's Freedom of Information Act and deny access to government information to which we are legally allowed.
On 27 December 2019 then opposition leader, Anthony Albanese, addressed the Chifley Research Centre Conference in Sydney and stated:
We don't need a culture of secrecy. We need a culture of disclosure … Reform freedom of information laws so they can't be flouted by government.
It is disappointing that despite these statements his government has done everything they can to make our Freedom of Information regime turn into a Freedomfrom Information regime.
In the 47th Parliament the Senate conducted an inquiry into 'The operation of Commonwealth FOI laws' and made 15 recommendations, all of which were ignored by the Albanese Government.
One could easily have concluded that the Government were very happy with the broken FOI system. But they would have been wrong. On 3 September 2025 the Government introduced the FOI Amendment Bill 2025, promoted as a 'reform' package; its 'reform' was in the wrong direction, , pushing the Act towards obstruction and secrecy, not openness and transparency.
The Bill proved friendless. It was friendless amongst civil society groups and in the Senate and the other place—except for Government senators and MPs. On the 5th of March this year, Minister Gallagher had to embarrassingly withdraw the Bill from the notice paper to avoid it being turfed out by the opposition, Greens and the entirety of the cross bench.
It appears that the government wasn't deterred by the Senate's rejection of the Bill, and they have another way to stop information being released under Australia's Freedom of Information laws.
FOI is intended to enable people to participate in democracy and scrutinise their government. It allows them to be well informed and make up their own minds about major public issues; not be limited to carefully curated scraps of information the government chooses to release at times of its choosing. FOI lets people see how government works on the inside and whether our politicians and bureaucrats are really working with the public interest in mind, not just their own political interests.
The government has embarked on a different pathway to crush access to information through FOI.
In the past three months two FOI decisions by the Administrative Review Tribunal, determining a citizen was entitled to access the information they had asked for, have been appealed to the Federal Court by the government. That's their right, so fair enough. What isn't fair is that the government has also asked for their costs to be paid if the citizen is unsuccessful in defending the ART's decision.
When a citizen goes to the Federal Court, it's all very legal and technical, and unless they are an experienced barrister, they are going to lose. So, the citizen needs to be able to find around $150,000 to pay for experienced legal representation. That's $150,000 for each of the appeals against the ART decisions.
However, keep in mind the government is also seeking costs. So that citizen could end up having to cover the governments legal costs as well, and they don't have the financial limitations most Australians do. But let's assume their legal costs were to be the same, that's another $150,000 for each of those FOI decisions. So even if a person wins an FOI dispute, they could still lose.
That's a $300,000 bill to get access to information about what the government is doing.
People that use FOI just want information. We know from the Auditor-Generals' audit into FOI this year that, across the entities they examined, 54% of FOI decisions reviewed by the Information Commissioner resulted in the government having to release more information. That means in deciding what information a person could have under FOI, the government got it wrong 54% of the time, and that's a pretty good reason to challenge their decisions. But those challenges will never happen if people fear the government can take them to the cleaners by dragging them into court.
In June this year, I forwarded a letter to the Attorney-General with the signatures of 18 parliamentarians, from both houses, voicing the concerns held by the cross bench. Independents and minor party members alike came together to ask the Attorney-General, who is responsible for litigation policy across the Commonwealth, to intervene and instruct the appealing department to act as 'a model litigant' in the proceedings.
Fundamentally, we asked the government to meet the citizens legal costs, for an appeal they initiated—in the interest of fairness, and to ensure that an appeal did not become a mechanism for manipulating other FOI applicants in the future.
Let me be clear, I and my parliamentary colleagues do not dispute the governments right to appeal a decision. But we recognise the financial imbalance.
Unfortunately, the Attorney-General ignored that pleading, and instead has enabled a doubling down in reinforcing that FOI wins could be dangerous to the public, by allowing a second FOI appeal to be initiated.
This Bill is a response to the attack on our FOI laws that behaviour represents.
My Bill seeks to ensure, consistency with the objectives of the existing FOI Act which states access to government information is to be provided at the 'lowest reasonable cost', by requiring that the Government meets a citizen's reasonable legal costs if it appeals a decision on a citizen's FOI from either the Information Commissioner or the Administrative Review Tribunal, to the Federal Court.
This is not an unprecedented provision. The Bill is modelled off section 40(8) of the South Australian FOI Act which mandates, when a South Australian wins an Ombudsman's FOI review, that the reasonable costs of any Government appeals are met by the appealing department. It's like that in South Australia because the government has recognised they should treat their citizens fairly, and act as a model litigant.
The Labor Government is trying to crush FOI. They failed with their FOI Amendment Bill and are now coming back with a brutal financial tactic intended to keep the government's secrets buried. It's a bludgeon being used to hammer the lid down on the truth. This Bill will stop that behaviour.
Members of Parliament (Staff) Amendment (Safe Staffing Guarantee) Bill 2026
That the following bill be introduced: A Bill for an Act to amend the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984 , and for related purposes.
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
Every senator and member of Parliament needs staff to help them do their job. We ask a great deal of those staff, and we have a responsibility to make sure they have the support they need.
This should be something we can agree on, whatever our politics.
Our staff read legislation, prepare briefings, speak with community groups, and help us develop amendments. They help us get answers from government departments and bring the concerns of the people we represent before this Parliament.
The demands on our offices are growing. Staff are dealing with complex legislation, competing deadlines, and people who need our help. We cannot keep asking them to take on more work without considering whether we have enough people to do it.
Long hours and personal commitment will only take an office so far. We need staffing arrangements that allow people to do their work properly, without unreasonable pressure becoming the norm.
Recent disputes over staffing allocations have shown why we need greater certainty. Rather than revisit every disagreement, this Parliament should enact a bipartisan and fair minimum arrangements for the future.
Those who hold senior office have responsibilities under the legislative framework and to this Parliament. That includes ensuring that those outside government have fair resources and support to carry out their duties.
This Bill puts minimum personal staffing allocations into law.
It provides independent parliamentarians with at least four personal staff positions to help them examine legislation, prepare amendments, and carry out their parliamentary duties. An independent must deal with matters across the full range of government portfolios without the broader support available within a larger political party. Their staffing should recognise that responsibility.
For minor parties, the Bill provides additional staffing support to meet the responsibilities they carry in this Parliament. They can hold the balance of power and must examine proposals across government, develop policy, and negotiate amendments. As political circumstances change, they may also be called upon to support or form part of a government or opposition. They need the people and expertise to meet those responsibilities.
For the Opposition, the Bill provides a minimum level of staffing linked to the size of Government personal staffing. A shadow cabinet must examine each minister's decisions, respond to legislation, and develop an alternative programme for government. It needs sufficient support not only to question the government of the day, but to prepare to take its place.
This Bill deals with personal staffing allocations for our work in Parliament, separate from the electorate staff who assist our communities.
Personal staff help us research policy, examine legislation, prepare amendments, and support the work of office-holders, shadow ministers, independents, and whips. They also help us explain our decisions and respond to a 24-hour media cycle.
Ministers, shadow ministers, independent members, whips, and other office-holders rely on personal staff to research policy, examine legislation, prepare amendments, and advise on parliamentary procedure. These staff also help us explain our decisions and respond to a 24-hour media cycle.
Their work is essential to the functioning of Parliament. We are responsible for the decisions we make, but we need sound advice and thorough preparation to make them. This Bill ensures that those outside government have a fair minimum of that support.
That work is essential to the effective operation of our democracy.
This Bill has been brought forward because these arrangements in a democracy should not depend on which party forms government or who sits on the crossbench. They should provide certainty through changes of government and changes in parliamentary representation.
The Prime Minister can provide more staff above the minimums, and party leaders remain responsible for distributing their collective allocations.
Supporting this Bill does not mean supporting another senator's policies. It means recognising that we have all been elected to do a job, and that our staff need reasonable workloads and the resources to help us do it.
I ask senators across this chamber to work together on that basis.
I commend the Bill to the Senate.
That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Climate Change and Energy, by no later than midday on Monday, 26 October 2026, Snowy Hydro Limited's cost reassessment report, including any attachments and correspondence from Snowy Hydro Limited concerning the cost reassessment.
GENERAL BUSINESS NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 801
That the Senate—
(a) notes that order for the production of documents no. 734, agreed to by the Senate on 16 September 2026, concerning the Driving the Nation program has not been complied with; and
(b) requires the Minister representing the Minister for Climate Change and Energy to comply with the order by no later than midday on Thursday, 15 October 2026.
GENERAL BUSINESS NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 802
That the Senate—
(a) notes that order for the production of documents no. 659, agreed to by the Senate on 8 September 2026, concerning Safeguard Mechanism modelling, has not been complied with; and
(b) requires the Minister representing the Minister for Climate Change and Energy to comply with the order by no later than midday on Thursday, 15 October 2026.
GENERAL BUSINESS NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 803
That the Senate—
(a) notes that order for the production of documents no. 658, agreed to by the Senate on 8 September 2026, concerning contractor work, has not been complied with; and
(b) requires the Minister representing the Minister for Climate Change and Energy to comply with the order by no later than midday on Thursday, 15 October 2026.
Wearable Recording Devices (Import Control) Bill 2026
That the following bill be introduced:
A Bill for an Act to amend legislation relating to customs and for related purposes.
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
Already we are seeing the impact that covert wearable recording devices are having on our community with women and girls in particular being filmed without their knowledge and consent, and the content shared online for engagement and clicks.
It is a key example of technology outpacing the law. For years we have said that privacy laws have failed to keep pace with the internet and associated technology. Laws written in the era of the postal service weren't fit for purpose for this connected, high-tech era.
This bill is a proportionate and reasonable step in the face of rapid and high impact advances in technology. It seeks to put in place a temporary pause on the importation of these devices to give our privacy laws time to catch up.
The Government currently has draft privacy laws out for public consultation, but they are months away from implementation and they are not focused on this emerging privacy threat. We should hit pause in the meantime on these imports to reduce immediate harm.
The Greens recognise that glasses with built in cameras are already on the market. Earbuds with hidden cameras are coming sooner than we expect. These are products designed, in many cases, to look completely ordinary while doing something that is frankly quite creepy: recording the people around the wearer without their knowledge and without their consent.
Many have asked how this technology differs from phones or cameras which can also be used to film others and share the content. The key difference is the covert nature of the filming on these new devices. While it is possible to secretly film someone on a phone it is a fact that most people in the community can recognise if a phone is pointed towards them and possibly recording, the same cannot be said of most of the so-called smart glasses on the market or the coming earbuds.
We know what is happening out there with the take-up of this technology and for once Parliament should act before a wave of harm washes across the country. We need to act now before the genie is well and truly out of the bottle.
A person wearing what looks like an ordinary pair of glasses, or an ordinary set of earbuds, can film everyone they walk past, everyone they sit next to, everyone they speak with, and none of those people will have any way of knowing it is happening. There is no red light, no visible lens, no cue at all. Or there is a light but its small and can only be seen if the person recording is within a metre of the person being filmed.
Our existing privacy protections were built for a world of visible cameras and known recording devices. They were not built for surveillance that hides in plain sight, worn as jewellery or fashion.
The bill works by inserting a new regulation into the Customs (Prohibited Imports) Regulations 1956 . It prohibits the importation of a wearable recording device unless the Minister for Home Affairs, or an authorised officer within the department, grants written permission. The definition of a wearable recording device is deliberately broad, because the harm here comes from concealment, not from any one particular product category. There is nothing inherently more harmful about glasses than other concealed recording devices, but they are becoming increasingly common with corporations selling them at price points from $20 through to thousands of dollars.
It covers devices capable of video recording that are designed to be worn on the body or carried as an accessory, including glasses, earpieces and earbuds, watches, pins and badges, pendants and brooches, and headwear. The intention is to capture the whole emerging category of covert recording products, not just today's smart glasses, so that the law does not fall a generation of gadgets behind the moment it passes.
This definition is not extended to cover existing camera technology such as "Go Pros" that may be worn on your body using a strap or similar as the device is a camera not headwear.
Some of these smart glasses have a light when recording or otherwise operating, many do not. There are no laws that regulate the use of these devices in public places. This is despite the clear community agreement that its inappropriate for these to be used to non-consensually film women and children in public places.
Updating our laws will also serve to protect those using these devices. Currently a person uploading their morning routine or hours with their children to the tech companies linked with these devices have few protections on how this data is used. We have seen the reports of such footage being viewed by workers in Kenya without the knowledge or consent of those who uploaded it. This is likely the tip of the iceberg. To be clear this import ban as much protects the privacy of potential wearers as it does people being secretly recorded.
This bill is deliberately narrow in what it stops. It only applies to devices that can record video. Audio only devices are not affected. This is about the specific and growing risk of covert visual surveillance carried on the body, not a broader intervention into wearable technology as a whole.
The bill also protects people who genuinely rely on this kind of technology. Some Australians use camera equipped wearables as disability aids, and this bill does not want to get in the way of that. The Minister or an authorised officer must consider whether a device is intended for use as a disability aid when deciding whether to grant a permission, using the existing definition of disability aid found in the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 . That means the door stays open for legitimate assistive technology, even while the door closes on devices designed to spy on the public.
Following consultation with the blind community we make it clear the bill is drafted to ensure that the Minister can provide an exemption to permit the importation of smart glasses which will then be available to a person using them as a disability aid. In the very likely event the Minister determines an exemption is required to meet the needs of disabled people it will not require a specific application to be made by those people. This is intended to ensure the import pause does not unfairly impact blind users, and further does not create additional administrative burdens.
This is not a permanent ban. The prohibition automatically expires 12 months after commencement. It gives the Parliament with the help of experts and civil society, the space to properly examine the privacy implications of this technology and to design a considered, lasting regulatory response, rather than leaving Australians exposed to covert surveillance products on an ongoing basis.
Australians have a reasonable expectation that they are not being secretly filmed by the people around them. That expectation is being tested by a wave of new products entering the market faster than our laws traditionally respond. This bill does not try to solve every question raised by wearable technology. It does one thing, and it does it now: it stops the immediate flow of covert recording devices into the country while the harder work of updating our privacy laws catches up. .
I commend the bill to the Senate.
That the exposure draft of the Online Safety Amendment (Digital Duty of Care) Bill 2026 and, contingent upon its introduction, the provisions of the bill, be referred to the Environment and Communications Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 24 November 2026.
The Senate divided. [15:52]
(The President—Senator Lines)
(1) That a select committee, to be known as the Select Committee on Fuel Tax Credits for Mining and Resource Companies, be established to inquire into and report on:
(a) whether, and, if so, how, the Fuel Tax Credit scheme is preventing the decarbonisation of the mining and resources industry;
(b) whether, and, if so, how, reforms to the Fuel Tax Credit scheme could promote productive investment in the mining and resources sector that reduces greenhouse gas emissions and aligns with the Government's climate obligations;
(c) whether, and, if so, how, the Fuel Tax Credit scheme has increased and will increase diesel consumption in Australia and the implications for Australia's economic and geostrategic vulnerability;
(d) how reducing expenditure on subsidising diesel use in the mining and resources sector could assist the Government's budget position; and
(e) any other related matters.
(2) That the committee present its final report by 11 November 2026.
(3) That the committee consist of 6 senators, as follows:
(a) two nominated by the Leader of the Government in the Senate;
(b) two nominated by the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate;
(c) one nominated by the Leader of the Australian Greens; and
(d) one nominated by minority party or independent senators.
(4) That:
(a) participating members may be appointed to the committee on the nomination of the Leader of the Government in the Senate, the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate or any minority party or independent senator;
(b) participating members may participate in hearings of evidence and deliberations of the committee, and have all the rights of members of the committee, but may not vote on any questions before the committee; and
(c) a participating member shall be taken to be a member of a committee for the purpose of forming a quorum of the committee if a majority of members of the committee is not present.
(5) That the committee may proceed to the dispatch of business notwithstanding that all members have not been duly nominated and appointed and notwithstanding any vacancy.
(6) That the committee elect as chair a member nominated by the Leader of the Australian Greens and, as deputy chair, a member nominated by the Leader of the Government in the Senate.
(7) That the deputy chair shall act as chair when the chair is absent from a meeting of the committee or the position of chair is temporarily vacant.
(8) That the chair, or the deputy chair when acting as chair, may appoint another member of the committee to act as chair during the temporary absence of both the chair and deputy chair at a meeting of the committee.
(9) That, in the event of an equally divided vote, the chair, or the deputy chair when acting as chair, have a casting vote.
(10) That the committee have power to appoint subcommittees consisting of three or more of its members, and to refer to any such subcommittee any of the matters which the committee is empowered to consider.
(11) That the committee and any subcommittee have power to send for and examine persons and documents, to move from place to place, to sit in public or in private, notwithstanding any prorogation of the Parliament or dissolution of the House of Representatives, and have leave to report from time to time its proceedings and the evidence taken and such interim recommendations as it may deem fit.
(12) That the committee be provided with all necessary staff, facilities and resources and be empowered to appoint persons with specialist knowledge for the purposes of the committee with the approval of the President.
(13) That the committee be empowered to print from day to day such papers and evidence as may be ordered by it, and a daily Hansard be published of such proceedings as take place in public.
The Senate divided. [15:56]
(The President—Senator Lines)
That there be laid on the table by the Minister for Foreign Affairs, by no later than 5 pm on Thursday, 5 November 2026, copies of all ministerial submissions, emails, briefing notes, meeting notes and electronic or instant messages created after 1 August 2026 between the minister or her office and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade in relation to the decision to withdraw Australia from the joint statement of September 2026 relating to the imposition of trade sanctions on businesses in the West Bank.
The Senate divided. [16:00]
(The President—Senator Lines)
That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Climate Change and Energy, by no later than 5 pm on Thursday, 22 October 2026, copies of any briefing notes, ministerial submissions, emails and electronic or other instant messages created after 1 October 2026 between the Minister for Climate Change and Energy or his office and the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water that relate to the United States of America's decision to temporarily lift certain sanctions on diesel from the Russian Federation.
The Senate divided. [16:03]
(The President—Senator Lines)
That the Senate—
(a) notes that:
(i) a response to order for the production of documents no. 672, agreed to on 10 September 2026 and relating to Major and Local Community Infrastructure Program, was tabled on 12 October 2026,
(ii) in a letter tabled as part of the response, the Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister notes that '[t]he Prime Minister was not the decision maker for grants awarded under the Major and Local Community Infrastructure Program, nor is the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet the department for the administration of this program' and that '[r]equests for documentation in relation to these grants would appropriately be directed to the Department of Infrastructure [sic]', and
(iii) the letter does not make a claim of public interest immunity in relation to any documents sought by the order, nor does it deny the existence of documents within the scope of the order;
(b) rejects the suggestion that an order of the Senate may not be complied with because a minister believes it 'would appropriately be directed' elsewhere when that minister holds documents that are within the scope of the order; and
(c) requires the Minister representing the Prime Minister to, by no later than midday on 21 October 2026, table a new response to the order which either:
(i) clarifies that no documents within the scope of the order exist, or
(ii) provides the documents sought by the order, subject to any claim of public interest immunity.
The Senate divided. [16:07]
(The President—Seantor Lines)
That the government business order of the day relating to the Private Health Insurance Amendment (Modernising the Private Health Insurance Rebate) Bill 2026 be discharged from the Notice Paper .
The Senate divided. [16:12]
(The President—Senator Lines)
That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Communications, by no later than midday on 21 October 2026:
(a) a copy of all internal correspondence between Australian Broadcasting Corporation personnel, sent or received during the period of 12 July to 12 August 2026 (including letters, emails and messages) concerning the reference to Mrs Gina Rinehart in the Race Around the World program, initially broadcast on 12 July 2026 (the program); and
(b) a copy of all internal correspondence, during the period of 12 July to 12 August 2026 (including letters, emails and messages) sent to or received from the Australian Broadcasting Corporation Ombudsman concerning the investigation of the program.
The Senate divided. [16:17]
(The President—Senator Lines)
That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:
The need for the Labor Government to make resource corporations pay their fair share, raising an estimated $45 billion a year in additional public revenue to deliver cost-of-living relief, fund essential services and accelerate the transition away from fossil fuels.
That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:
The need for the Labor Government to make resource corporations pay their fair share, raising an estimated $45 billion a year in additional public revenue to deliver cost-of-living relief, fund essential services and accelerate the transition away from fossil fuels.
The Senate divided. [16:52]
(The President—Senator Lines)
That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:
The Albanese Labor Government's proposed 30 per cent trust tax, which threatens to slug small and family businesses, farmers and hardworking Australians with up to $13.3 billion in restructuring costs, punishing the very people who take risks, create jobs and drive our economy, while Labor continues to pile more taxes, costs and uncertainty onto Australian businesses.
That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:
The Albanese Labor Government's proposed 30 per cent trust tax, which threatens to slug small and family businesses, farmers and hardworking Australians with up to $13.3 billion in restructuring costs, punishing the very people who take risks, create jobs and drive our economy, while Labor continues to pile more taxes, costs and uncertainty onto Australian businesses.
The Albanese Labor Government's proposed 30 per cent trust tax, which threatens to slug small and family businesses, farmers and hardworking Australians with up to $13.3 billion in restructuring costs, punishing the very people who take risks, create jobs and drive our economy, while Labor continues to pile more taxes, costs and uncertainty onto Australian businesses.
And if we really believe, we will begin to love. And if we love, naturally, we will try to do something. First in our own home, our next door neighbor, in the country we live, in the whole world.
I know there will be times when we will not see a lot of each other …
That senators be discharged from and appointed to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the National Anti-Corruption Commission as follows:
On 14 October 2026—
Discharged—Senator Ghosh
Appointed—Senator Tyrrell
On 19 October 2026—
Discharged—Senator Tyrrell
Appointed—Senator Ghosh
That the Senate take note of the report.
That the Senate take note of the report.
That the Senate take note of the report.
That the Senate take note of the report.
Australian Government response to the Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services Report
Financial abuse: an insidious form of domestic violence
October 2026
Introduction
The Government thanks the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services for its work on the prevalence and impact of, and potential responses to, financial abuse in Australia.
The Government recognises financial abuse as a complex and insidious form of violence that may be perpetrated within the context of family and domestic violence or elder abuse, as well as within other relationships, such as carer relationships.
The Government sincerely thanks the individuals and organisations who made submissions and provided evidence over the Committee's public hearings, in particular, those victim-survivors who shared their personal experiences with the Committee.
The Committee's report outlines the growing evidence that perpetrators of family and domestic violence are exploiting government and financial systems to control, threaten or harass a current or former partner, often as part of a pattern of coercive control and financial abuse.
Around 16 per cent of women and 7.8 per cent of men in Australia have experienced economic abuse from a current or previous partner. [ 1 ] This can cause economic hardship, costly and lengthy legal proceedings, and emotional and administrative burdens for victim-survivors, making it difficult to rebuild their lives after leaving an abusive relationship.
Ending financial and economic abuse in all its forms requires sustained and coordinated effort at all levels of the community and government to prevent it from happening, hold perpetrators to account and support those who have experienced or are experiencing violence.
The Government's actions to help end financial abuse
Working for Women: a national strategy for gender equality (2024)
Working for Women: a national strategy for gender equality (Working for Women) is the Government's 10 year strategy for advancing gender equality in Australia. Its five priority areas include ending violence against women, aligned with the National Plan to End Violence Against Women and Children 2022-32, and advancing women's economic equality and security.
Working for Women acknowledges the connections between safety and economic security and the need to work across all priority areas to advance gender equality. Working for Women includes addressing financial abuse, including in government systems, among its future actions, and its reporting framework tracks experience of economic abuse. Working for Women is the framework for whole of government policy and structural reform to advance gender equality.
National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children 2022 - 2032
The National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children 2022-2032 (National Plan) outlines the Government's vision to end gender-based violence in one generation, and provides the national policy framework for ending gender-based violence in Australia, guiding the work of Australian, state and territory governments, family safety experts and front-line services. The National Plan identifies economic abuse including financial abuse as a common form of family and domestic violence and a key area of focus for addressing gender-based violence in Australia.
Audit of Australian Government Systems
The Government is working to embed safety and stamp out opportunities for systems abuse, including financial abuse, within government systems. Following the National Cabinet meeting on 6 September 2024, the Government commenced an audit of key Australian government systems to identify areas where they are being weaponised by perpetrators of family and domestic violence, in order to stamp out opportunities for systems abuse.
Work is underway across government to address the findings from the audit so far and to identify interventions and system improvements that can protect and support victim-survivors of gender-based violence. As an immediate response to the audit, the Government has committed to practical reforms to embed safety in Commonwealth systems and close loopholes exploited by perpetrators of financial abuse. These include:
Further details of these reforms are referred to in greater detail throughout the body of this Government Response.
The audit is an ongoing mechanism to examine existing government systems and identify how they can be strengthened to improve safety for victim-survivors and prevent further abuse. The Government is also working to apply the principles of Safety by Design into systems reform and design to contribute to preventing systems and financial abuse.
Implementing recommendations of reviews in relation to financial abuse
Financial abuse, particularly in government systems, has been the subject of further investigations since the Committee handed down its report, including by the Commonwealth Ombudsman's report Weaponising Child Support: when the system fails families (2025) and the Tax Ombudsman's reportIdentification and management of financial abuse within the tax system (2025).
The Government is implementing the recommendations of these reports to improve the management of financial abuse in the child support and taxation systems.
Structure of this Response
The response indicates that the Government either Supports, Supports in Principle or Notes each recommendation.
Each of these terms is explained in the following table.
Response to the recommendations
Recommendation 1
That the Australian Government establish a mechanism for co-design with victim-survivors of financial abuse (including through representative groups) in relation to the implementation of legislative, regulatory and sector-driven reforms aimed at mitigating the prevalence and impact of financial abuse, including the recommendations of this report.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation. The Government has a range of stakeholder engagement mechanisms which emphasise the value of lived experience in the development of policy relating to financial abuse and other forms of family and domestic violence, as well as a broad range of other stakeholders. These include the Financial Elder Abuse Project; the Lived Experience Advisory Council; and the Systems Abuse Priority Reforms Stakeholder Engagement Forum. The Government will continue to engage with these groups, and to centre the experience of victim-survivors of family and domestic violence in the development of financial abuse related policy.
Recommendation 2
That the Australian Government amend the National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009 and ASIC's Regulatory Guide 209 to specifically require:
Recommendation 3
That the Australian Government establish a review of Responsible Lending Obligations and the National Credit Code, informed by the lived experience of victim-survivors, to consider options for:
Recommendation 4
That the Australian Government amend the National Credit Code to require financial institutions to inform all borrowers of changes to joint credit contracts in circumstances of reasonably suspected family and domestic violence, including financial abuse.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports recommendations 2,3 and 4 in principle.
The Government recognises the important role that consumer credit laws, lending practices and financial institutions play in identifying, preventing and responding to financial abuse. The evidence before the Committee highlighted the ways in which credit and lending arrangements can be misused by perpetrators to facilitate coercive control, create financial liabilities, or further disadvantage victim-survivors of family and domestic violence.
The Government agrees that lending frameworks should appropriately support victim-survivors and reduce opportunities for financial abuse, and notes that any changes to responsible lending obligations, consumer credit requirements or notification arrangements must be carefully designed to ensure they are effective in practice, proportionate, and do not create unintended consequences, including opportunities for perpetrators to further exploit or manipulate financial systems.
The Government will continue to consider options to address the intent of these policy proposals through collaborative work with industry, consumer advocates, victim-survivor representatives and relevant regulators, including the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC). This work will be informed by ongoing consultation and consideration of lived experience to ensure any measures strengthen protections for victim-survivors, support access to appropriate credit, and cannot be readily manipulated or weaponised by perpetrators of family and domestic violence.
As part of this work, the Government will consider opportunities to strengthen responses to financial abuse within existing consumer credit and regulatory frameworks. The Government will also consider how reforms in this area align with broader efforts to address systems abuse and embed safety across financial and government systems.
Recommendation 5
That the Australian Government consider how to best allow financial institutions to document and/or flag actual or suspected financial abuse against their customers when detected or reasonably suspected, including without explicit consent from customers. This may include amendments to the Privacy Act 1988 .
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation.
The Government acknowledges the intent of this recommendation and recognises the importance of enabling financial institutions to identify and respond appropriately to actual or suspected financial abuse. The ability to safely record, flag and share relevant information can assist financial institutions to better support victim-survivors and reduce opportunities for ongoing abuse.
The Government is considering options to address this issue as part of a second tranche of reforms to the Privacy Act 1988 . On 31 August 2026 the Government released draft legislation and an accompanying consultation paper on privacy reforms. These consultations respond to the committee's recommendation by proposing amendments to the Privacy Act's existing "permitted general situation" for serious misconduct. The reforms would broaden the exception from "misconduct of a serious nature" to "wrongdoing of a serious nature", recognising that it may apply to forms of financial abuse, including where a person is exploiting a customer's vulnerability or misusing an enduring power of attorney.
The proposal would also provide greater clarity that financial institutions can collect, use and disclose personal information where they reasonably suspect serious wrongdoing and reasonably believe the handling is necessary to take appropriate action, helping to facilitate earlier detection and response to suspected financial abuse.
In considering these proposals, the Government will continue to engage with relevant stakeholders to ensure any reforms appropriately balance privacy protections with the need to support and protect people experiencing financial abuse. The Government will also consider how any proposed measures can be designed to minimise unintended consequences and ensure that information-sharing or flagging mechanisms cannot be manipulated or weaponised by perpetrators to cause further harm to victim-survivors.
Recommendation 6
That the Australian Government amend the Credit Reporting Code to specify that financial abuse is considered 'circumstances beyond the individual's control'; and that the Australian Retail Credit Association (ARCA) develop a best-practice financial abuse guideline for credit reporting bodies and credit providers.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises the importance of ensuring that victim-survivors of financial abuse are not unfairly disadvantaged within the credit reporting system as a result of conduct perpetrated against them.
The Credit Reporting Code was amended in 2024 to clarify that domestic abuse, including financial abuse, is a circumstance beyond an individual's control for the purposes of the credit reporting framework. On 1 August 2026, the Australian Retail Credit Association published its Best Practice Principles: Domestic Abuse and Credit .[ 2 ]
These actions represent important steps towards the intent of the Committee's recommendation. The Government will continue to monitor their implementation and effectiveness and will consider whether further changes are required as part of its consideration of the Review of Australia's Credit Reporting Framework. This will include consideration of opportunities to strengthen protections for victim-survivors and promote consistent industry responses to financial abuse across the credit reporting system.
Recommendation 7
That the Australian Government undertake appropriate action, including legislation, to clarify that circumstances of family violence, elder abuse and homelessness constitute a serious threat to the life, health and safety of an individual. This may include amendments to the Privacy Act.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises that family violence, elder abuse and homelessness can pose significant risks to an individual's safety and wellbeing, and that appropriate information-sharing settings can play an important role in supporting early intervention, risk management and access to services.
The Government acknowledges the intent of this recommendation and is considering options to address the issue as part of a second tranche of reforms to the Privacy Act 1988 . The Government released draft legislation and an accompanying consultation paper on privacy reforms on 31 August 2026, as mentioned above in relation to Recommendation 5.
In considering these proposals, the Government will continue to engage with relevant stakeholders to ensure privacy settings appropriately support individuals experiencing family violence, elder abuse and other forms of vulnerability, while maintaining appropriate safeguards for personal information.
The Government will also consider how any reforms can best support victim-survivor safety, improve responses to financial and other forms of abuse, and minimise the risk of information-sharing provisions being misused or weaponised to cause further harm.
Recommendation 8
That the Australian Government amend the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 to allow insurers to deem a joint insurance policy to be a composite policy in situations involving separation or divorce of co-insurers, and in situations where a victim-survivor's claim would ordinarily be denied due to the conduct of their perpetrator of financial abuse or coercive control.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises that joint insurance arrangements can create additional barriers for victim-survivors seeking to access insurance entitlements following relationship breakdown, including where financial abuse, coercive control or other forms of family and domestic violence have occurred. The Government also acknowledges concerns that, in some circumstances, the conduct of a perpetrator may have the effect of preventing a victim-survivor from accessing a benefit under an insurance policy.
The Government supports the intent of ensuring that victim-survivors are not unfairly disadvantaged in the administration of insurance claims due to the actions of a perpetrator. However, any reforms in this area would require careful consideration of their legal, regulatory and operational impacts, including interactions with existing insurance and contract law frameworks.
The Government will engage with industry, consumer representatives, victim-survivor advocates, regulators and other relevant stakeholders in relation to the intent of this recommendation.
The Government will also consider how any potential reforms align with broader efforts to prevent financial abuse, improve responses to family and domestic violence, and embed safety within financial systems and services.
Recommendation 9
Recognising the legitimate choice of Australians to have self-managed superannuation funds, the committee recommends that the Australian Government undertake a review of the intersection between financial abuse and the superannuation system, particularly in relation to self-managed superannuation funds; and ensure that the review is informed by the lived experience of victim-survivors.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises the importance of understanding how financial abuse can intersect with the superannuation system, including within self-managed superannuation funds (SMSFs). Evidence provided to the Committee highlighted concerns that superannuation arrangements may, in some circumstances, be exploited by perpetrators of financial abuse as a means of exerting control, restricting access to assets, or undermining a victim-survivor's long-term financial security.
The Government agrees that the experiences of victim-survivors should inform consideration of measures to strengthen protections within the superannuation system. The Government will continue to consider opportunities to improve safeguards against financial abuse, informed by engagement with regulators, industry, victim-survivors and relevant stakeholder groups.
As part of broader reforms to improve consumer safety in the superannuation system, the Government announced a range of reforms impacting SMSFs on 19 August 2026. These measures include providing the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) with additional powers to prevent or delay superannuation rollovers into SMSFs where there are indicators of financial abuse, scams or other misconduct, and to engage directly with trustees and members where concerns arise. These powers are intended to support early intervention and reduce the risk of irreversible financial harm.
In addition, the Government is introducing mandatory education requirements for SMSF trustees. These requirements will help ensure trustees better understand their obligations and responsibilities, and provide an additional safeguard against misconduct, poor decision-making and the exploitation of vulnerable individuals.
The Government considers that these reforms represent important steps towards addressing the issues identified by the Committee. The Government will continue to monitor emerging risks and consider whether further action is required to strengthen protections against financial abuse within the superannuation system, including in relation to SMSFs.
Recommendation 10
Amend the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 to provide a mechanism so that a beneficiary who has perpetrated domestic or family abuse, including financial abuse, and domestic violence related suicide, against the superannuation account holder can be declared an invalid beneficiary of the account holder's superannuation death benefits.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation.
The Government recognises the importance of ensuring that perpetrators of family and domestic violence do not financially benefit from their abuse, including through access to a victim-survivor's superannuation death benefits. The Government agrees that the superannuation system should appropriately support victim-survivors and their families and align with broader efforts to prevent and respond to financial abuse.
The Government has consulted on reforms to prevent perpetrators of family and domestic violence from receiving a victim's superannuation death benefits and will release exposure draft legislation on this measure in due course. The proposed reforms would provide a mechanism to prevent a perpetrator from benefiting from the superannuation death benefits of their victim in specified circumstances.
In developing these reforms, the Government has extended the policy to include defined benefit schemes, recognising the importance of establishing protections across different parts of the superannuation system. The Government will also engage with state and territory governments regarding potential for schemes established in state and territory legislation to adopt similar reforms.
The Government considers that these reforms will make an important contribution to addressing financial abuse and ensuring the superannuation system does not facilitate ongoing financial advantage for perpetrators. The Government will continue to engage with stakeholders, including victim-survivor advocates, industry participants and state and territory governments, as it progresses these reforms.
Recommendation 11
That the Australian Government undertake a review of all financial products and services and government services to ensure that a perpetrator cannot financially benefit from the death of victim-survivors, including in circumstances of domestic violence related suicide.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation in principle.
The Government agrees with the intent of this recommendation and notes that work is already underway to address this issue. This includes reforms to prevent perpetrators of family and domestic violence from receiving a victim's superannuation death benefits.
The Government has consulted on these reforms, expanded the proposed policy to include defined benefit schemes, will release draft legislation in due course and is engaging with a broad range of stakeholders on implementation considerations.
The Government will continue to consider whether additional measures are required across financial products, services and government systems to address circumstances where a perpetrator may derive a financial benefit from the death of a victim-survivor, including where family and domestic violence has been a contributing factor.
Given the breadth and complexity of the issues involved, any further action will require careful consideration of existing legislative and regulatory frameworks, interactions between Commonwealth, state and territory laws, and the practical implications for financial institutions, service providers and affected individuals. This work will be informed by engagement with relevant stakeholders, including victim-survivor representatives, regulators, industry and state and territory governments.
The Government will continue to pursue opportunities to strengthen safeguards across systems and services to ensure perpetrators are held to account and do not benefit from financial arrangements arising from their abuse.
Recommendation 12
That the Australian Government continue to monitor the effectiveness of the Family Law Act 1975 in recognising financial abuse.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation.
The Government recognises the importance of ensuring that the family law system appropriately identifies and responds to financial abuse, including as a form of family and domestic violence. The Government is committed to monitoring the effectiveness of recent family law reforms in strengthening protections for victim-survivors and preventing the misuse of legal processes to inflict financial harm.
The Government is required to commence a review of the Family Law Amendment Act 2023 by 6 May 2027 and theFamily Law Amendment Act 2024 by 10 June 2028. These reviews will provide an opportunity to assess the operation and effectiveness of recent reforms, including their impact on victim-survivors experiencing financial abuse.
The Family Law Amendment Act 2023 introduced measures to reduce systems abuse within the family law system, including by enabling courts to make harmful proceedings orders to prevent parties from using family law proceedings to cause harm, including financial harm. The reforms also enable courts to make costs orders where parties fail to comply with their duty to conduct proceedings in a manner that facilitates the just, efficient and cost-effective resolution of disputes.
The Family Law Amendment Act 2024 strengthened the recognition of financial abuse in family law property proceedings, including by clarifying the matters courts may consider when determining property settlements.
The Government will continue to monitor the implementation and effectiveness of these reforms, informed by engagement with courts, legal assistance services, family violence experts and people with lived experience, to ensure the family law system appropriately recognises and responds to financial abuse.
Recommendation 13
That state and territory law societies undertake a review of the ethical obligations of legal practitioners in relation to receipt of instructions which may have a financial abuse motive and available penalties for members who actively enable or facilitate financial abuse on behalf of their clients where there is no other reasonable basis underlying the instruction given by the client.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation.
The Government recognises concerns raised during the inquiry about the potential for legal services and legal processes to be used to facilitate or perpetuate financial abuse, including as part of a broader pattern of coercive control or systems abuse. The Government agrees that legal practitioners have an important role in upholding the integrity of the legal system and ensuring that professional obligations are consistent with efforts to prevent and respond to family and domestic violence.
While the regulation of legal practitioners and professional conduct rules is primarily a matter for the legal profession and relevant regulatory bodies, including state and territory law societies, the Government supports consideration of whether existing ethical obligations, guidance and disciplinary frameworks appropriately address circumstances where legal services may be used to facilitate financial abuse.
The Government will continue to engage directly with state and territory law societies on this issue. This will include engagement with representatives of the legal profession through roundtables and broader consultations on financial abuse, including discussions on opportunities to strengthen sector responses and professional practice settings.
The Government will continue to work collaboratively with law societies, legal regulators, family violence experts and people with lived experience as it considers next steps to address financial abuse and systems abuse across the legal sector. The Government encourages the legal profession to consider the Committee's recommendation and identify ways to strengthen awareness, professional standards and safeguards to prevent the facilitation of financial abuse through legal processes.
Recommendation 14
That the Australian Government implement measures to achieve greater consistency in state and territory Enduring Power of Attorney (EPOA) laws applying best practice to prevent financial abuse; and to promote education and awareness programs aimed at reducing elder abuse occurring through misuse of EPOAs.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises that enduring powers of attorney are important legal instruments that support autonomy and decision-making, but that they can also be misused to facilitate financial abuse and elder abuse. The Government agrees that greater consistency across jurisdictions and increased community awareness can help strengthen safeguards and reduce opportunities for abuse.
States and territories are responsible for enduring power of attorney laws. The Government will continue to work collaboratively with state and territory governments to support efforts to promote best practice and improve consistency in enduring power of attorney frameworks where appropriate.
The National Plan to End the Abuse and Mistreatment of Older People 2026-2036, released on 16 March 2026, includes a strong focus on efforts to achieve greater consistency in enduring power of attorney laws across Australia and on education and awareness initiatives that promote understanding of life planning documents, decision-making arrangements and available safeguards.
Through implementation of the National Plan, the Government will continue to work with states and territories, older Australians, advocacy organisations and other stakeholders to strengthen awareness of enduring powers of attorney and support measures that reduce the risk of financial abuse and misuse of these arrangements.
Recommendation 15
That the Australian Government implement a mandatory requirement for providers of financial services and products, as well as government agencies to include a 'quick exit' button on webpages (in accordance with current best practice) to assist victim-survivors of family and domestic violence and financial abuse.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises the importance of practical safety features, including "Quick Exit" functionality, in helping victim-survivors of family and domestic violence and financial abuse safely access information and services online. Features that allow users to quickly leave a webpage can assist in reducing the risk of monitoring, coercion or retaliation by perpetrators.
A number of Australian Government agencies, including Services Australia, have already implemented "Quick Exit" functionality as part of broader efforts to improve the safety and accessibility of online services for people experiencing violence and abuse.
The Government supports the intent of promoting the broader adoption of safety-by-design features across sectors. However, the design, implementation and management of websites operated by financial services providers are matters for individual organisations, taking into account the nature of their services, customer needs and digital platforms.
The Government will continue to work with industry, regulators and other stakeholders to promote awareness of best-practice approaches to supporting victim-survivors online, including consideration of safety features such as "Quick Exit" functionality.
Recommendation 16
That financial institutions introduce minimum operating standards, with a view to achieving best-practice standards through continuous improvement over time, for including increased friction points in relation to online application processes and electronic transactions to better protect against financial abuse on online platforms.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises that online banking, insurance and other financial services can be exploited by perpetrators of financial abuse, and that improved safeguards within digital channels can play an important role in reducing opportunities for harm. The Government acknowledges that appropriately designed friction points, warnings, verification processes and other safety features may assist financial institutions to identify, deter and respond to suspected financial abuse while maintaining access to services for legitimate users.
This recommendation is directed to financial institutions and industry bodies. As such, the Government is not proposing to mandate minimum operating standards at this time.
The Government is working with industry participants, regulators and peak bodies to identify opportunities for collaboration to reduce the risk that financial products, services and systems are used to facilitate financial abuse. This includes consideration of safety-by-design principles and other measures that can help strengthen protections for victim-survivors and increase accountability for perpetrators.
The Government encourages financial institutions to continue to develop and implement best-practice approaches to preventing and responding to financial abuse, including through continuous improvement of online processes, transaction monitoring, customer safeguards and other risk-management controls.
Recommendation 17
That the Australian Banking Association, the Australian Federal Police, victim-survivor advocate organisations and relevant government departments and other stakeholders co-design standard operating guidelines for the referral of reasonably suspected or reported financial abuse to the financial institutions used by suspected perpetrators and victim-survivors. Triggers for referral should include credible reports made to anonymous law enforcement hotlines, informal and formal reports made to law enforcement, and court proceedings such as the attainment of AVO's. The Australian Government should consider any legislative amendments required to give effect to such standard operating guidelines.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises the potential value of improved information-sharing arrangements and referral pathways to assist in identifying, preventing and responding to financial abuse. The Government agrees that greater coordination between financial institutions, law enforcement agencies, victim-survivor organisations and government agencies may assist in strengthening protections for victim-survivors and reducing opportunities for perpetrators to misuse financial systems.
The Government also recognises that any referral framework must be carefully designed to balance victim-survivor safety, privacy, procedural fairness and operational effectiveness. Particular consideration would need to be given to the evidentiary basis for referrals, safeguards against misuse, and the potential consequences of action being taken on the basis of reported or suspected conduct.
The Government will continue to engage with the Australian Banking Association, financial institutions, law enforcement agencies, victim-survivor advocates, regulators and other relevant stakeholders to explore opportunities to strengthen responses to financial abuse across the financial system.
As part of this work, the Government will consider whether legislative, regulatory or operational changes may be required to support appropriate information-sharing and referral mechanisms, while ensuring any arrangements are victim-centred, proportionate, and cannot be manipulated or weaponised by perpetrators to cause further harm.
This work aligns with the Government's broader efforts to address systems abuse, embed safety by design, and strengthen cross-sector responses to family and domestic violence and financial abuse.
Recommendation 18
That financial institutions be required to maintain anonymous reporting mechanisms through which victim-survivors of domestic and family violence, or other individuals, can report actual or suspected financial abuse of the institutions' customers.
Recommendation 19
That financial institutions ensure that a referral or report of suspected family and domestic violence involving one of their customers triggers immediate engagement with that customer, preferably through in-person attendance at a physical branch or office, to determine the suitability of their current and future financial products.
Recommendation 20
That financial institutions immediately review the accessibility of their in-person banking services and, where necessary, take steps to ensure that customers have reasonable access to in-person banking services or banking support services.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports recommendations 18, 19 and 20 in principle.
The Government recognises the importance of ensuring that victim-survivors of family and domestic violence and financial abuse can access timely, safe and effective support from financial institutions. The Government also acknowledges the important role that frontline banking services, customer engagement processes and reporting channels can play in identifying and responding to financial abuse.
These recommendations are directed to financial institutions and relate to the design and delivery of customer services and support arrangements. The Government notes that many financial institutions have introduced specialised family and domestic violence programs, dedicated support teams, and a range of in-person, telephone and digital assistance channels for customers experiencing vulnerability, including financial abuse.
The Government is working with industry, regulators, peak bodies and victim-survivor advocates to identify opportunities to strengthen the financial sector's response to financial abuse. This includes consideration of how reporting mechanisms, customer engagement practices and service delivery models can better support victim-survivors, while maintaining appropriate safeguards for privacy, safety and procedural fairness.
The Government recognises that victim-survivors have different needs and preferences when engaging with financial institutions. Accordingly, responses to suspected financial abuse should be flexible, trauma-informed and victim-centred, including through access to in-person support where appropriate and reasonably available.
The Government encourages financial institutions to continue improving their approaches to identifying and responding to financial abuse, including through enhanced reporting pathways, specialist support services and accessible customer assistance, consistent with industry best practice and broader efforts to embed safety by design across the financial system.
Recommendation 21
That the Australian Government, in conjunction with the Australian Financial Complaints Authority, consider potential remedies for customers suffering financial abuse who have suffered loss after a financial institution has failed to provide reasonably appropriate access to in-person banking services or other support services in circumstances where the financial institution was aware (or should have been aware) that the customer was at high risk of financial abuse.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises the importance of ensuring that financial institutions respond appropriately where indicators of financial abuse or family and domestic violence are identified. Access to suitable support services, including in-person assistance where appropriate, can be important in helping victim-survivors navigate financial arrangements, maintain financial independence and reduce the risk of further harm.
The Government agrees that customers should have access to effective avenues for redress where a financial institution has not met its obligations or provided appropriate support. The Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) provides an important independent dispute resolution service and can consider complaints having regard to applicable industry codes, standards and good industry practice.
The Government will work with AFCA, regulators, industry, code owners and victim-survivor advocates to consider whether existing consumer protections, industry codes and dispute resolution mechanisms adequately support people experiencing financial abuse.
This work will form part of the Government's broader efforts to strengthen responses to financial abuse and embed safety across financial systems and services.
Recommendation 22
That financial institutions, government and relevant stakeholders all increase financial literacy education and in-person support to assist older Australians to use electronic banking services and reduce the risk of financial elder abuse.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises that improving financial literacy, digital capability and access to support services can help older Australians confidently engage with financial services and reduce their vulnerability to financial abuse, scams and other forms of exploitation. The Government also acknowledges that a lack of familiarity with digital banking services can increase reliance on others to manage financial affairs, creating opportunities for misuse and abuse.
This recommendation is directed to financial institutions, governments and other stakeholders. The Government notes that a range of initiatives are already underway across governments, the financial sector and community organisations to improve financial capability and digital inclusion among older Australians.
Through the National Plan to End the Abuse and Mistreatment of Older People 2026-2036, the Government is supporting efforts to prevent elder abuse through education, awareness raising and targeted support for older people. The Government will continue to work with state and territory governments, financial institutions, community organisations and advocacy groups to promote initiatives that strengthen financial literacy and digital confidence among older Australians.
The Government encourages financial institutions to continue providing accessible and tailored support to older customers, including in-person assistance where appropriate, to help them safely access and use banking services. The Government also supports continued collaboration across sectors to identify and promote best-practice approaches to reducing the risk of financial elder abuse and supporting the financial independence of older Australians.
Recommendation 23
That the Australian Banking Association develop and implement minimum operating standards, with a view to moving to best-practice standards through continuous improvement over time, applying to all authorised deposit-taking institutions in relation to identifying and responding to abusive descriptions in electronic money transfers.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises concerns that electronic payment descriptions can be misused by perpetrators to harass, intimidate, monitor or otherwise abuse victim-survivors. The Government acknowledges that financial institutions have an important role in identifying and responding to emerging forms of financial abuse facilitated through banking products and services.
The Government also acknowledges the work already being undertaken by banks and industry bodies to strengthen responses to family and domestic violence and financial abuse, including efforts to identify harmful transaction activity and improve support for affected customers. The Government encourages industry to continue building on this work and sharing best-practice approaches across the sector.
This recommendation is directed to the Australian Banking Association and authorised deposit-taking institutions. As such, the Government is not proposing to prescribe minimum operating standards in this area.
The Government is working with industry, regulators, peak bodies and victim-survivor advocates to identify opportunities to strengthen the financial sector's response to financial abuse and limit the potential for financial products and services to be used to perpetrate harm. This includes consideration of safety-by-design principles, operational practices and industry-led initiatives that can help identify and address abusive conduct within financial systems.
The Government encourages the banking sector to continue developing consistent and effective approaches to identifying and responding to abusive transaction descriptions and other forms of technology-enabled financial abuse, with a view to improving protections for victim-survivors and reducing opportunities for perpetrators to misuse the financial system.
Recommendation 24
That the Australian Government consider introducing appropriate penalties for the use of abusive descriptions in electronic money transfers to harass, intimidate or harm the holder of the account.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation in principle.
The Government acknowledges the intent of this recommendation and is committed to protecting victim-survivors of financial abuse from harassment, intimidation and coercive control through any means of communication, including through the misuse of financial services and digital technologies.
The Government notes concerns raised during the inquiry regarding the use of electronic money transfer descriptions to harass, threaten or otherwise harm victim-survivors. The Government also acknowledges the work already being undertaken by financial institutions and industry bodies to identify and respond to this form of abusive conduct.
The Criminal Code Act 1995 includes a number of offences relating to the misuse of telecommunications services, including conduct involving the use of carriage services to menace, harass or cause offence. These offences may apply in circumstances where electronic communications are used as a tool of abuse.
The Government will continue to work with industry, regulators, law enforcement agencies and victim-survivor advocates to better understand emerging forms of technology-enabled financial abuse and to assess whether existing legislative, regulatory and operational responses remain appropriate and effective.
Recommendation 25
That, prior to approving joint banking or credit products, financial institutions implement reasonable and practical continuous disclosure requirements relating to family and domestic violence to assist with the identification of financial abuse.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises that joint banking and credit products can, in some circumstances, be used to facilitate financial abuse, coercive control and other forms of family and domestic violence. The Government acknowledges the importance of ensuring that financial institutions are able to identify indicators of financial abuse and respond appropriately to protect affected customers.
This recommendation is directed to financial institutions. As such, the Government is not proposing to mandate specific continuous disclosure requirements at this time. However, the Government supports the objective of strengthening the financial sector's ability to identify and respond to financial abuse and reduce opportunities for perpetrators to misuse financial products and services.
The Government notes that a number of financial institutions have already developed family and domestic violence policies, customer support frameworks and specialised processes to identify and assist customers experiencing financial abuse. The Government encourages industry to continue building on this work and to consider opportunities to strengthen safeguards in relation to joint banking and credit products.
The Government will continue to work with industry, regulators, consumer representatives and victim-survivor advocates to explore measures that support the early identification of financial abuse and improve responses when abuse is identified. This work will be informed by the need to ensure any measures are effective, proportionate and cannot be manipulated or weaponised by perpetrators to cause further harm.
The Government remains committed to collaborating with industry to improve protections for victim-survivors and strengthen the financial system's response to financial abuse.
Recommendation 26
That the Australian Government legislate to require financial institutions to ensure the following requirements for establishing a joint account:
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises that joint accounts can, in some circumstances, be used to facilitate financial abuse, coercive control and other forms of family and domestic violence. The Government agrees that customers should have a clear understanding of their rights, responsibilities and available safeguards when establishing and operating joint accounts, and that financial institutions should take appropriate steps to support informed decision-making and account safety.
The Government supports the intent of strengthening consumer protections in relation to joint accounts. However, any legislative requirements would need to be carefully considered to ensure they are proportionate, operationally effective and suitable across the range of joint account products and customer circumstances.
The Government notes that this recommendation relates to the practices of financial institutions and that many institutions already provide joint account holders with separate access arrangements, information about account authorities and available account controls. The Government encourages industry to continue reviewing and strengthening these practices to ensure they appropriately respond to the risks of financial abuse.
The Government will continue to work with industry, regulators, consumer representatives and victim-survivor advocates to explore options to address the intent of this recommendation. This work will consider opportunities to improve transparency, customer awareness and account safeguards, while ensuring any measures are practical to implement and cannot be manipulated or weaponised by perpetrators to cause further harm.
Through its broader work on systems abuse and safety by design, the Government remains committed to strengthening protections for victim-survivors and reducing opportunities for financial abuse within the financial system.
Recommendation 27
That financial institutions implement the recommendations of ASIC's report titled Hardship, hard to get help: Findings and actions to support customers in financial hardship relating to identifying and providing additional support to vulnerable consumers experiencing financial hardship.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises the importance of ensuring that customers experiencing financial hardship, including victim-survivors of family and domestic violence and financial abuse, receive timely, appropriate and trauma-informed support from financial institutions. Effective hardship practices can play a critical role in preventing further financial harm and helping individuals maintain financial stability during periods of vulnerability.
This recommendation is directed to financial institutions. The Government notes the work of the ASIC in its report Hardship, hard to get help: Findings and actions to support customers in financial hardship , which identified opportunities for lenders that provide credit regulated under the National Credit Code to improve their hardship practices and better support vulnerable consumers.
The Government acknowledges the work already being undertaken by ASIC and industry to strengthen responses to customers experiencing hardship and vulnerability. The Government encourages financial institutions to continue implementing ASIC's findings and guidance, including measures to improve the identification of vulnerable customers, the accessibility of hardship assistance, and the consistency of support provided to those experiencing family and domestic violence or financial abuse.
The Government will continue to work with industry, regulators, consumer representatives and victim-survivor advocates to support best-practice approaches to hardship assistance and to strengthen protections for customers experiencing financial abuse. This work complements the Government's broader efforts to embed safety within financial systems and improve responses to financial abuse and systems abuse across the community.
Recommendation 28
That ASIC conduct a review within 24 months on the implementation and operation of the recommendations of its report titled Hardship, hard to get help: Findings and actions to support customers in financial hardship relating to identifying and providing additional support to vulnerable consumers experiencing financial hardship.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises the importance of ensuring that financial institutions provide appropriate support to customers experiencing financial hardship, including those experiencing family and domestic violence and financial abuse.
ASIC has continued its work following the publication of Report 782 Hardship, hard to get help: Findings and actions to support customers in financial hardship , including by reviewing independent assurance reports relating to lenders' actions in this area and taking enforcement action where appropriate.
In September 2025, ASIC published Report 815 Hardship, not as hard to get help—But lenders need to do more , which reported observed improvements in how lenders are supporting their customers experiencing financial hardship, but also that some are showing slower progress. The Government notes that ASIC continues to actively monitor industry practices and drive improvements in hardship assistance through its regulatory, supervisory and enforcement activities.
Given ASIC's ongoing work in this area, the Government considers that existing mechanisms are providing continued oversight of the implementation and effectiveness of ASIC's hardship recommendations. The Government will continue to monitor outcomes for consumers experiencing vulnerability, including victim-survivors of financial abuse.
Recommendation 29
That the Australian Government implement a legislative requirement for financial institutions to report periodically on the number of customers identified as experiencing financial abuse, similar to the current requirements for financial hardship.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises the value of data and reporting in improving understanding of the prevalence and impacts of financial abuse and supporting evidence-based policy and regulatory responses. Consistent and reliable information can assist governments, regulators and industry to identify emerging trends, assess the effectiveness of interventions and strengthen support for victim-survivors.
The Government supports the intent of improving visibility of financial abuse within the financial system. However, any mandatory reporting requirements would require careful consideration, including how financial abuse is identified and recorded, the consistency of reporting across institutions, privacy and confidentiality considerations, and the potential regulatory burden on industry.
The Government notes that work is ongoing across government, regulators and industry to improve the identification and response to financial abuse. As financial institutions continue to develop their policies, systems and capabilities in this area, the quality and consistency of available data is also expected to improve.
The Government will continue to work with industry, regulators, victim-survivor advocates and other stakeholders to consider opportunities to enhance data collection and reporting on financial abuse. This work will consider whether additional reporting mechanisms would improve outcomes for victim-survivors, support regulatory oversight and inform future policy development, while ensuring appropriate safeguards are in place and avoiding unintended consequences.
Recommendation 30
That the Australian Government undertake a review of Buy Now Pay Later credit reforms, to commence within 24 months of the amendments coming into effect, to consider their effectiveness in supporting victim-survivors of financial abuse, and specifically the inclusion of Buy Now Pay Later products under Responsible Lending Obligations.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises concerns about the potential for Buy Now Pay Later products to be misused as a tool of financial abuse and acknowledges the importance of ensuring that consumer credit reforms appropriately protect victim-survivors of family and domestic violence.
The Government notes that significant reforms have recently been implemented to bring Buy Now Pay Later products within the consumer credit regulatory framework, including the application of Responsible Lending Obligations. These reforms are intended to strengthen consumer protections and improve lending practices across the sector.
The Government agrees that it will be important to assess the effectiveness of these reforms once they have been operating for a sufficient period of time. The Government has indicated it will conduct a review, informed by stakeholder feedback, two years after the measures commence. Any future review should consider the extent to which the reforms are achieving their objectives and whether they remain fit for purpose, including whether they are improving outcomes for consumers experiencing vulnerability and reducing opportunities for financial abuse.
The Government will continue to monitor the implementation of the Buy Now Pay Later reforms, including through engagement with regulators, industry, consumer representatives and victim-survivor advocates. This work will help inform consideration of whether further evaluation or policy action is required to ensure the regulatory framework appropriately responds to the risks of financial abuse and supports victim-survivors.
Recommendation 31
That the Banking Code of Practice, Customer Owned Banking Code of Practice and the Buy Now Pay Later Code of Practice be amended to:
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises the importance of ensuring that financial institutions identify and respond appropriately to customers experiencing financial abuse. Explicit recognition of financial abuse within customer vulnerability frameworks can help promote consistent responses across the financial sector and improve access to support for victim-survivors.
This recommendation is directed to industry code owners and financial institutions. The Government notes that many banks, customer-owned banking institutions and Buy Now Pay Later providers have already taken steps to strengthen their responses to family and domestic violence, including through dedicated support teams, staff training, hardship arrangements and measures to identify and assist vulnerable customers.
The Government encourages industry to continue building on this work, including through consideration of whether industry codes remain fit for purpose in addressing financial abuse and whether opportunities exist to further strengthen protections for customers experiencing vulnerability.
The Government is working with industry, regulators, peak bodies and victim-survivor advocates to identify opportunities to improve responses to financial abuse across the financial system. This includes consideration of approaches to better identify customers who may be experiencing financial abuse and ensure they are connected with appropriate support services.
The Government supports continued industry leadership in this area and encourages ongoing review of industry standards and practices to ensure they reflect emerging evidence, lived experience and best-practice approaches to preventing and responding to financial abuse.
Recommendation 32
That the general insurance industry implement minimum operating and customer-service standards, with a view to moving to best-practice standards through continuous improvement over time, relating to identifying and responding to financial hardship being experienced by victim-survivors of financial abuse.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises that victim-survivors of financial abuse may experience significant financial hardship and face unique challenges when engaging with insurance providers. Appropriate identification of vulnerability and effective customer support can play an important role in helping victim-survivors access insurance products, maintain coverage and navigate claims and financial hardship processes.
This recommendation is directed to the general insurance industry. The Government notes that insurers and industry bodies have undertaken work in recent years to strengthen their responses to customers experiencing vulnerability, including family and domestic violence, financial hardship and other forms of disadvantage.
The Government encourages the insurance sector to continue building on this work and to consider opportunities to strengthen industry standards, guidance and operational practices relating to the identification of, and response to, financial abuse and financial hardship. This includes ensuring staff are appropriately trained and that customers can access support pathways that are trauma-informed, accessible and responsive to their circumstances.
The Government is working with industry, regulators, consumer representatives and victim-survivor advocates to identify opportunities to improve responses to financial abuse across the financial system. This includes consideration of how financial institutions can better identify and support customers experiencing vulnerability and financial hardship.
The Government supports continued industry leadership and continuous improvement in this area and encourages insurers to adopt best-practice approaches that strengthen protections for victim-survivors and reduce opportunities for financial abuse.
Recommendation 33
That the Australian Government amend the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 to require a 'conduct of others' clause in all retail insurance policies.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises concerns that victim-survivors of financial abuse may be unfairly disadvantaged where the actions of another person, including a perpetrator of family and domestic violence, affect their ability to make or benefit from an insurance claim. The Government agrees that insurance arrangements should appropriately support victim-survivors and reduce opportunities for perpetrators to cause further financial harm.
The Government supports the intent of ensuring that individuals are not denied access to insurance coverage or claims outcomes because of conduct that was outside their control. However, any amendment to the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 would require careful consideration of its interaction with existing insurance law, policy design, underwriting practices and claims processes.
The Government will explore options to address the intent of this recommendation through engagement with insurers, consumer representatives, victim-survivor advocates, regulators and other relevant stakeholders. This work will consider existing industry practices and whether further legislative, regulatory or operational reforms are appropriate.
In undertaking this work, the Government will consider how any measures can be implemented effectively and consistently across the insurance sector, while minimising unintended consequences and ensuring reforms cannot be manipulated or weaponised by perpetrators to cause further harm.
This work will complement the Government's broader efforts to address financial abuse, strengthen protections for victim-survivors and embed safety across financial systems and services.
Recommendation 34
That Part 9 of the General Insurance Code of Practice and the Life Insurance Code of Practice be amended to define family violence and financial abuse and to better promote the financial safety of victim-survivors of family and domestic violence.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises the importance of ensuring that insurance industry frameworks appropriately reflect the experiences of victim-survivors of family and domestic violence, including financial abuse. Clear recognition of family violence and financial abuse within industry codes can support greater consistency in how insurers identify vulnerability, engage with affected customers and provide appropriate support.
This recommendation is directed to the owners of the General Insurance Code of Practice and the Life Insurance Code of Practice. The Government notes that the insurance industry has undertaken significant work in recent years to improve responses to customers experiencing vulnerability, including through family and domestic violence policies, staff training and enhanced customer support arrangements.
The Government encourages the insurance industry to continue building on this work and to consider opportunities to strengthen industry codes and guidance to better recognise family violence and financial abuse and promote the financial safety of victim-survivors.
The Government is working with industry, regulators, consumer representatives and victim-survivor advocates to identify opportunities to improve responses to financial abuse across the financial system. This includes consideration of how industry standards and practices can better support victim-survivors and reduce opportunities for financial products and services to be used as a tool of abuse.
The Government supports ongoing industry leadership and continuous improvement in this area and encourages regular review of industry codes to ensure they reflect emerging evidence, lived experience and best-practice approaches to preventing and responding to financial abuse.
Recommendation 35
That the Australian Government undertake a review of the COVID-19 early release of super scheme, with a focus on the number of members who may have withdrawn superannuation savings under coercion and the retirement and other impacts on victim-survivors who accessed their superannuation as a result of financial abuse; and consider an appropriate scheme for the repayment of superannuation by individuals whose withdrawals were the direct result of financial abuse, to enable them to restore their superannuation balances
Australian Government Response
The Government notes this recommendation.
The Government recognises concerns raised by the Committee regarding the potential for individuals to have accessed their superannuation under the COVID-19 early release of superannuation scheme as a result of coercion, financial abuse or other forms of exploitation.
The Government review of the COVID-19 policy response package, released on 29 October 2024, included consideration of the effectiveness of the COVID-19 early release of superannuation scheme and its broader impacts. The review provided important insights into the operation of the scheme and the experiences of those who accessed it.
The Government acknowledges the significant and lasting financial impacts that financial abuse can have on victim-survivors, including impacts on long-term retirement savings. The Government also recognises that any proposal to establish a repayment mechanism for individuals whose superannuation withdrawals were the direct result of financial abuse would require careful consideration of matters including eligibility, evidence requirements, administrative complexity, equity and interactions with the broader superannuation system.
The Government will continue to consider evidence relating to financial abuse within the superannuation system as part of its broader work to strengthen protections for victim-survivors, address systems abuse and improve financial outcomes for people affected by family and domestic violence.
Recommendation 36
That the Australian Government consider the implementation of minimum operating standards, with a view to moving to best-practice standards through continuous improvement over time, to mitigate the risk of elder abuse in relation to superannuation.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation.
The Government recognises the importance of protecting older Australians from financial abuse and acknowledges that the superannuation system should include appropriate safeguards to identify and respond to circumstances where members may be experiencing elder abuse, exploitation or other forms of vulnerability.
The Government is progressing mandatory service standards for the superannuation industry, which will consider requirements for superannuation funds to appropriately identify and respond to members in vulnerable circumstances, including those experiencing elder abuse. These standards are intended to improve member outcomes and promote consistent practices across the industry.
The Government consulted on the proposed service standards in 2025 and will undertake further consultation on draft standards in due course. This process will provide an opportunity to consider how superannuation funds can best support vulnerable members and implement safeguards that reduce the risk of financial abuse.
Through this work, the Government will continue to engage with industry, regulators, consumer groups and advocates for older Australians to ensure the superannuation system remains responsive to emerging risks and supports the financial wellbeing and security of older Australians.
Recommendation 37
That accounting bodies, financial advice and planning peak bodies, and victim-survivor advocate organisations co-design education resources for service providers to enable increased identification of financial abuse and timely reporting of suspected abuse to financial institutions and law enforcement bodies.
Recommendation 38
That accounting, financial planning and financial advice industry bodies develop and review ethical obligations of their profession in relation to receipt of instructions which may have a financial abuse motive and institute accompanying penalties for members who actively enable or facilitate financial abuse on behalf of their clients where there is no other reasonable basis underlying the instructions given by the client.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports recommendations 37 and 38 in principle.
The Government recognises that accountants, financial advisers, financial planners and other trusted professionals can play an important role in identifying indicators of financial abuse, supporting early intervention and helping victim-survivors access appropriate assistance. Improving awareness of financial abuse and strengthening professional responses can reduce opportunities for perpetrators to misuse professional services to facilitate or conceal abusive conduct.
These recommendations are directed to professional bodies, industry associations and relevant stakeholders. The Government notes that a range of education, training and professional development initiatives have already been undertaken across the financial services sector to improve understanding of vulnerability, family and domestic violence, and financial abuse.
The Government encourages accounting bodies, financial planning and financial advice peak bodies, victim-survivor advocates and other stakeholders to continue collaborating to develop educational resources, guidance and professional training that improve the sector's ability to identify and respond to financial abuse.
The Government also supports consideration by professional bodies of whether existing ethical obligations, professional standards and disciplinary frameworks appropriately address circumstances where professional services may be used to facilitate financial abuse, coercive control or other forms of exploitation. Professional bodies are best placed to consider whether additional guidance, standards or sanctions are required to ensure members meet community expectations and uphold the integrity of their professions.
The Government will continue to engage with industry, professional bodies, regulators and victim-survivor advocates through its broader work to address financial abuse and systems abuse. This includes considering opportunities to strengthen professional awareness, capability and accountability, while ensuring responses are proportionate, practical and focused on improving outcomes for victim-survivors.
Recommendation 39
That the finance sector develops a financial Safety by Design framework and assessment tools. The committee further recommends that the framework is developed in consultation with the financial services industry, victim-survivors, family and domestic violence academics, community service providers and regulatory design experts.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises the value of Safety by Design principles in reducing opportunities for financial abuse and embedding victim-survivor safety into the design and delivery of financial products, services and systems. The Government agrees that preventing harm should be a key consideration in the development of financial services, rather than relying solely on responses after abuse has occurred.
This recommendation is directed to the finance sector. The Government notes that industry, regulators, consumer organisations and victim-survivor advocates have already undertaken important work to improve responses to financial abuse and other forms of vulnerability. The Government also continues to promote the application of Safety by Design principles through its broader work to address systems abuse and strengthen protections for victim-survivors.
The Government encourages the financial services sector to work collaboratively with victim-survivors, family and domestic violence experts, community organisations, regulators and design specialists to identify opportunities to embed Safety by Design principles across financial products and services. This includes consideration of tools, frameworks and processes that assist organisations to identify risks, mitigate opportunities for abuse and improve customer safety outcomes.
The Government is working with industry and peak bodies to identify where Government may work collaboratively with the financial sector to limit the potential for financial systems to be used to perpetrate financial abuse. This includes consideration of approaches that strengthen system design, improve identification of harm and support consistent responses to financial abuse across the sector.
The Government supports continued innovation and collaboration in this area and encourages industry-led initiatives that help build a safer and more resilient financial system for all Australians.
Recommendation 40
That financial institutions that provide mortgages implement the standard practice of offering multiple offset accounts for joint mortgages.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises that the design of mortgage and banking products can influence the financial independence and safety of customers, including victim-survivors of family and domestic violence and financial abuse. Features that provide greater flexibility in the management of joint finances may assist some customers to better manage household finances and reduce opportunities for financial control or coercion.
This recommendation is directed to financial institutions that provide mortgage products. The Government notes that some lenders already offer multiple offset account arrangements and other product features designed to provide customers with greater flexibility in managing their finances.
The Government is not proposing to mandate specific mortgage product features. However, the Government encourages financial institutions to consider how product design can better support customers experiencing vulnerability, including through the application of Safety by Design principles and consideration of the risks of financial abuse.
The Government is working with industry, regulators, consumer representatives and victim-survivor advocates to identify opportunities to strengthen the financial sector's response to financial abuse and reduce the potential for financial products and services to be used as a mechanism for coercive control.
The Government supports continued innovation and improvement in mortgage and banking products and encourages industry to consider whether greater flexibility and customer choice in account structures could improve outcomes for customers experiencing financial abuse or other forms of financial vulnerability.
Recommendation 41
That the Australian Government expand the Design and Distribution Obligations to include consideration of customers impacted by family and domestic violence, including financial abuse, and the potential for perpetrators to cause harm by misusing products and services.
Australian Government Response
The Government support this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises that financial products and services can, in some circumstances, be misused to facilitate financial abuse, coercive control and other forms of family and domestic violence. The Government agrees that product design and distribution practices can play an important role in identifying and mitigating risks of harm to consumers, including victim-survivors of financial abuse.
The Design and Distribution Obligations (DDO) framework was introduced to promote better consumer outcomes by requiring issuers and distributors of financial products to place consumers at the centre of product design and distribution decisions. The Government acknowledges the intent of this recommendation and the potential value of considering how the DDO framework can further support customers experiencing vulnerability, including those affected by family and domestic violence.
The Government will consider opportunities to address the intent of this recommendation through engagement with industry, regulators, consumer representatives and victim-survivor advocates. This work will consider the operation of the existing DDO framework and whether further guidance, regulatory measures or legislative changes may be warranted to better account for the risks of financial abuse and product misuse.
Recommendation 42
That financial service and product providers ensure that financial abuse is explicitly referenced in the terms and conditions for all financial products.
Recommendation 43
That financial institutions implement minimum operating standards, with a view to moving to best-practice standards through continuous improvement over time, for the introduction of positive friction points to minimise the risk that a customer is applying for a product under coercion or duress or without providing free and informed consent.
Recommendation 44
That financial institutions ensure that, in addition to general training about family and domestic violence, all employees have training in financial abuse that is appropriate to their level and role.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports recommendations 42, 43 and 44 in principle.
The Government recognises the importance of ensuring that financial institutions are equipped to identify, prevent and respond to financial abuse. Financial products and services can, in some circumstances, be used to facilitate coercive control and other forms of family and domestic violence. Strengthening product design, customer engagement practices and workforce capability can help reduce opportunities for abuse and improve outcomes for victim-survivors.
These recommendations are directed to financial service and product providers. The Government notes that many financial institutions have already taken significant steps to strengthen their responses to family and domestic violence and financial abuse, including through staff training, specialised support services, product safeguards and customer assistance programs.
The Government encourages industry to continue building on this work and to consider opportunities to strengthen customer awareness of financial abuse, improve product and service design, and enhance staff capability to identify and respond to indicators of abuse. This includes consideration of how product documentation, customer interactions and operating procedures can support informed decision-making and help identify circumstances involving coercion, duress or financial control.
The Government also supports continued application of Safety by Design principles across the financial sector, including through consideration of measures that can reduce opportunities for products and services to be misused by perpetrators. This may include the use of appropriate friction points, customer verification processes and other safeguards designed to support free and informed consent while minimising unintended consequences for legitimate customers.
The Government is working with industry, regulators, peak bodies and victim-survivor advocates to identify opportunities to strengthen the financial sector's response to financial abuse. As part of this work, the Government encourages financial institutions to ensure employees receive training appropriate to their role and responsibilities so they can effectively recognise and respond to financial abuse and connect customers with appropriate support.
Through ongoing collaboration with industry, the Government will continue to promote best-practice approaches that strengthen protections for victim-survivors, improve awareness of financial abuse and reduce the potential for financial products and services to be used as tools of abuse.
Recommendation 45
That financial institutions, government and relevant stakeholders all provide appropriate support to culturally and linguistically diverse consumers through:
Australian Government Response
The Government support this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises the importance of ensuring that culturally and linguistically diverse communities can access financial services, government services and support in a way that is safe, accessible and responsive to their needs. The Government also acknowledges that language barriers, cultural factors and limited awareness of available supports may increase vulnerability to financial abuse and reduce help-seeking.
Commonwealth service delivery agencies already provide a range of supports to assist culturally and linguistically diverse consumers. For example, Services Australia undertakes targeted multicultural community engagement activities and provides information and resources in languages other than English. The ATO also undertakes targeted communications to support culturally and linguistically diverse taxpayers and provides dedicated support channels for communities requiring additional assistance.
The Government recognises the importance of culturally appropriate communication, financial literacy initiatives and language services in supporting people experiencing financial abuse, including family and domestic violence. Government agencies will continue to consider how their services, communications and engagement activities can be tailored to meet the needs of culturally and linguistically diverse communities.
The Government encourages financial institutions, community organisations and other stakeholders to continue strengthening culturally appropriate support services, including through the use of interpreters, translated materials and staff training that supports engagement with culturally and linguistically diverse customers experiencing vulnerability.
The Government will continue to work with industry, service providers and community stakeholders to improve accessibility and ensure that people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds are able to access information, support and services that assist them to prevent, identify and respond to financial abuse.
Recommendation 46
That the Australian Government support Aboriginal Community Controlled Organisations to develop training and education programs for financial providers to increase understanding of financial and economic abuse of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians.
Australian Government Response
The Government support this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises the importance of ensuring responses to financial abuse are informed by the experiences, expertise and leadership of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. The Government acknowledges that Aboriginal Community Controlled Organisations (ACCOs) play a critical role in providing culturally safe and community-led services, including services that support financial wellbeing and respond to the impacts of financial abuse and economic disadvantage.
The Government funds a range of community organisations, including ACCOs, to deliver financial wellbeing and capability services. In delivering these services, community organisations and ACCOs may support individuals impacted by financial abuse, including First Nations Australians.
The Government supports the development and sharing of culturally informed knowledge and resources that improve understanding of financial and economic abuse affecting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. The Government encourages ongoing collaboration between ACCOs, financial institutions, community organisations and other stakeholders to strengthen awareness, capability and culturally appropriate responses across the financial services sector.
Through its broader work to address financial abuse and improve financial inclusion, the Government will continue to engage with First Nations communities and organisations to identify opportunities to strengthen culturally safe approaches to prevention, early intervention and support for victim-survivors of financial abuse.
Recommendation 47
That the Department of Defence and financial institutions co-design best-practice guidelines to assist financial services to address the specific needs of defence force families who may be experiencing financial abuse.
Australian Government Response
The Government support this recommendation in principle.
The Government acknowledges the intent of this recommendation and recognises that there are military-specific factors that can increase the risk of financial abuse for Australian Defence Force personnel and their families. Service life might include frequent postings, periods of separation, deployment-related pressures and financial dependency which can create circumstances that may increase vulnerability to family and domestic violence, including financial abuse.
The Department of Defence is progressing work to prevent and respond to family and domestic violence through the Defence Strategy for Preventing and Responding to Family and Domestic Violence 2023-2028 and its associated Action Plan. This work is intended to strengthen Defence's response to family and domestic violence and improve support for Defence personnel and their families.
Defence also provides targeted support to Defence members and their families and facilitates access to specialist financial and FDV supports and services.
The Government recognises the importance of ensuring that financial institutions understand and respond appropriately to the unique circumstances of Defence families. The Government encourages ongoing engagement between Defence, financial institutions and other stakeholders to strengthen awareness of the risks and indicators of financial abuse within Defence communities and to identify opportunities to improve support for affected individuals and families.
The Government will continue to monitor existing initiatives and consider opportunities to further strengthen support for Defence personnel and their families as part of its broader efforts to prevent and respond to financial abuse and family and domestic violence.
Recommendation 48
That the Australian Government consider the establishment of a reporting process relating to the relative effectiveness of financial products and government services in preventing and addressing financial abuse. This may include a benchmarking process or reporting framework administered by a government agency or through funding provided to an independent non-government organisation or body such as the Australian Banking Association.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises the value of data, reporting and evaluation in improving understanding of the effectiveness of financial products, services and government systems in preventing and responding to financial abuse. Greater transparency can help identify good practice, support continuous improvement and inform future policy, regulatory and industry responses.
The Government supports the intent of strengthening accountability and promoting best practice across sectors. However, any reporting or benchmarking framework would require careful consideration of its scope, objectives, governance arrangements and reporting burden, as well as the availability of consistent and reliable data on financial abuse.
The Government notes that work is already underway across government, regulators and industry to improve the identification of financial abuse, strengthen responses to victim-survivors and embed Safety by Design principles in products and services. As these initiatives mature, opportunities may emerge to better assess and compare the effectiveness of different approaches to preventing and addressing financial abuse.
The Government will continue to engage with regulators, industry, victim-survivor advocates and other stakeholders to consider options for improving transparency, data collection and performance measurement in relation to financial abuse. This will include consideration of whether a reporting framework, benchmarking process or other evaluation mechanism could assist in driving better outcomes for victim-survivors and reducing opportunities for financial abuse across government and financial systems.
Any future approach would need to be practical, evidence-based and informed by the experiences of victim-survivors, while ensuring that reporting arrangements support meaningful improvements in safety and do not create unintended consequences.
Recommendation 49
That the Australian Government make the necessary legislative and regulatory changes to enable the Australian Taxation Office to assume responsibility for government child support collections, replacing the Agency Collect program currently managed by Services Australia.
Recommendation 50
That the Australian Government mandate annual payer and payee declarations to the Australian Tax Office for individuals in private child support payment arrangements; and require appropriate acquittal documentation, including but not limited to bank statements, to substantiate all declarations.
Recommendation 51
That, where an annual payer declaration shows that child support payments are not reasonably aligned with payee child support entitlements, or where an annual payer declaration is not made, Private Collect child support payment arrangements automatically convert to Agency (Australian Tax Office) Collect child support arrangements.
Recommendation 52
That, at the end of each financial year, the Australian Government provide child support payees with refundable tax credits equal to any shortfall in child support payments for the preceding year; and raise a corresponding tax debt against the relevant child support payer, collectable by the Australian Tax Office as a debt owed to the Commonwealth.
Recommendation 53
That the Australian Government undertake a review of the formulas used to determine child support payments; and ensure that the review is informed by the lived experience of victim-survivors.
Australian Government Response
The Government notes recommendations 49 and 52. The Government supports recommendations 50, 51 and 53 in principle.
The Committee's recommendations highlight key areas of the Child Support Scheme that can be weaponised by perpetrators of family and domestic violence to facilitate financial abuse, coercive control and ongoing post-separation harm. The Government recognises the significant impacts that child support-related abuse can have on victim-survivors and their children, including financial insecurity, ongoing contact with perpetrators, and barriers to recovery following family violence.
The Government is taking action to improve the Child Support Scheme in response to these issues.
In the 2026-27 Budget, the Government announced significant reforms to address the weaponisation of the Child Support Scheme and strengthen protections against financial abuse. These reforms build on the views of people with lived experience of financial abuse, coercive control and ongoing post-separation harm, and recommendations from the Joint Select Committee on Australia's Family Law System, the Commonwealth Ombudsman's report Weaponising Child Support: when the system fails families , the findings of this Committee, and work undertaken through the Commonwealth Systems Abuse Audit.
In response to these reviews and recommendations, the Department of Social Services has commissioned a range of research, including the Survey of Separated Parents. This work informed the 2026-27 Budget reforms which were developed in collaboration with Services Australia, the Office for Women, the ATO and the Treasury.
Consistent with the Government's broader efforts to embed safety across Commonwealth systems, the Government's reforms will make the Scheme safer, fairer and more responsive to the experiences of victim-survivors. These reforms are intended to reduce opportunities for perpetrators to misuse the Scheme as a tool of financial abuse while maintaining an effective child support system that supports the wellbeing of children and families.
On 17 September 2026 the Government introduced legislation into Parliament to deliver the first stage of these reforms, with the Child Support and Family Assistance Legislation Amendment (Ending Financial Abuse in the Child Support Scheme No. 1) Bill 2026.
While the Government does not propose to transfer responsibility for child support collection from Services Australia to the ATO or assume private debts between parents, it agrees with the underlying intent of the recommendation, which is to improve compliance with child support obligations and ensure that children and receiving parents obtain the financial support to which they are entitled. The Government considers that these objectives can be more effectively achieved through targeted reforms to strengthen the administration, collection and enforcement of child support within the existing framework, while building on Services Australia's specialist expertise in delivering the Child Support Scheme and supporting families experiencing vulnerability, including family and domestic violence.
The Child Support Agency was originally established within the ATO before being transferred to the Department of Family and Community Services in 1998 following recommendations of the Joint Select Committee on Certain Family Law Issues. Since 2004, Services Australia (then the Department of Human Services) has been responsible for administering and delivering the Child Support Scheme.
Services Australia has extensive experience in administering child support arrangements, supporting vulnerable customers, responding to family and domestic violence, and managing complex family circumstances. In 2024-25, Services Australia collected the equivalent of 95.8 per cent of child support assessed in Agency Collect cases.
The Government recognises the importance of close cooperation between Commonwealth agencies in identifying and responding to financial abuse. The ATO already plays an important role in the operation of the Child Support Scheme by providing income information to support child support assessments and intercepting tax refunds to recover child support debts. Consistent with the Government's announced reforms, measures in the 2026-27 Budget will further strengthen information sharing between the ATO and Services Australia to improve administration of the Scheme and support compliance activities.
A key objective of the Child Support Scheme is that it remain non-intrusive, simple, flexible and efficient. Some parents prefer Private Collect arrangements. At the same time, the Government recognises that these arrangements can be vulnerable to misuse in some circumstances, particularly where family and domestic violence is present.
The Government is committed to ensuring that parents using Private Collect arrangements meet their child support obligations fairly and responsibly. To support this objective, the 2026-27 Budget included $64.9 million in funding to strengthen protections for parents in Private Collect arrangements and create improved pathways into Agency Collect where risks are identified.
These reforms include measures to improve transitions from Private Collect to Agency Collect and increase Services Australia's ability to recover unpaid child support where a parent moves into Agency Collect arrangements. The Government is also introducing a new Collection Arrangements Guidance Tool to provide parents entering into child support arrangements for the first time with more tailored advice on the collection options and their associated risks and benefits, to help them to choose the arrangements best suited to their circumstances. The guidance tool will include screening to identify risks including family and domestic violence or financial abuse.
The Government notes that where a payer fails to comply with a Private Collect arrangement, a payee may already elect to transfer to Agency Collect at any time. Services Australia may also collect unpaid child support from previous periods, including up to nine months in special circumstances. These provisions can be particularly important where a payee has experienced coercion, intimidation or pressure from a perpetrator not to seek assistance. The 2026-27 Budget reforms further expand on these provisions, by allowing payers to choose Agency Collect, and allowing payees to ask Services Australia to recover more unpaid child support when they move from Private Collect to Agency Collect.
The Government acknowledges the intent of Recommendation 52 regarding refundable tax credits for unpaid child support liabilities, and whilst the recommendation will not be directly adopted, the Government recognises the intent of improving financial security for child support recipients. The Child Support Scheme operates alongside broader government supports, including Family Tax Benefit, which assists eligible families with the costs of raising children. The Government considers that announced reforms to strengthen compliance, improve collection arrangements and reduce opportunities for financial abuse provide a more targeted response to the issues identified by the Committee.
The Government agrees to the intent of Recommendation 53 relating to review of the child support formula.
This recommendation aligns with the Government's response to Recommendation 18 of the Joint Select Committee on Australia's Family Law System. In 2023, the Government established the Child Support Expert Panel and commissioned a range of research relating to the costs of children and the operation of the child support formula. This work was undertaken to ensure that child support assessments continue to appropriately reflect the costs of raising children and the circumstances of contemporary Australian families.
The Government also recognises the importance of incorporating the experiences of service users, including victim-survivors of family and domestic violence, into ongoing policy development. The Child Support Stakeholder Consultation Group meets bi-annually with the Department of Social Services and Services Australia to provide direct feedback on the operation of the Scheme and the experiences of families interacting with it.
The Government will continue to monitor the operation of the Child Support Scheme and implement reforms to strengthen safety, improve compliance and reduce opportunities for financial abuse. The experiences of victim-survivors will remain a central consideration in the development and implementation of future reforms to ensure the Scheme supports the safety, wellbeing and financial security of children and families.
Recommendation 54
That the Australian Government develop a tax relief model for victim-survivors of financial abuse similar to the United States Internal Revenue Service 'innocent spouse relief' provisions.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises that victim-survivors of financial abuse may incur tax liabilities as a result of coercion, deception or other abusive conduct by a perpetrator. The Government agrees that victim-survivors should not be unfairly burdened by debts created through financial abuse and that perpetrators should be held accountable for liabilities they have caused through coercion or coercive control.
This recommendation aligns with the Government's 2025 election commitment to prevent perpetrators from using tax and corporate systems to create debts as a form of coercive control and to make perpetrators accountable for those debts where they do.
As a first step in delivering this commitment, the Government is progressing reforms to address coerced directorships and the misuse of corporate structures to facilitate financial abuse. These reforms are intended to ensure victim-survivors are not held responsible for company debts and obligations incurred as a result of coercion or abuse by a perpetrator.
Building on this work, the Government will publicly consult on broader measures to provide relief for victim-survivors and make perpetrators accountable for tax debts incurred by a victim-survivor due to coercion or financial abuse. This work will consider existing tax administration arrangements, the experiences of victim-survivors, and relevant international approaches, including features of the United States Internal Revenue Service's innocent spouse relief provisions.
Through these reforms, the Government is committed to ensuring that tax and corporate systems do not facilitate financial abuse, that victim-survivors are appropriately protected, and that responsibility for debts arising from coercive conduct rests with those responsible for creating them.
Recommendation 55
That the Australian Government amend the Corporations Act 2001 to ensure that the company director provisions appropriately recognise family and domestic violence , including financial abuse, as a reason why a director may be regarded as not in fact managing a company.
Recommendation 56
That the Australian Government extend the time period allowed to respond to a Director Penalty Notice in cases of reasonable claims of financial abuse.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports recommendation 55.
The Government supports recommendation 56 in principle
The Government recognises that corporate structures and director obligations can be exploited by perpetrators as a means of financial abuse and coercive control, including by coercing victim-survivors into becoming company directors and exposing them to significant debts, liabilities and compliance obligations.
Recommendations 55 and 56 align with the Government's 2025 election commitment to prevent perpetrators from using the tax and corporate systems to create debts as a form of coercive control and to make perpetrators accountable for those debts where they do.
The Government consulted on reforms in 2025 to address the misuse of tax and corporate systems to facilitate financial abuse, including circumstances involving coerced directorships and the operation of Director Penalty Notice arrangements. The Government will release draft legislation in due course to implement key elements of these reforms.
The proposed reforms are intended to strengthen protections for victim-survivors, ensure that the operation of company director provisions appropriately recognises the realities of family and domestic violence and financial abuse, and reduce opportunities for perpetrators to misuse corporate structures to cause financial harm.
In developing these reforms, the Government has also considered the concerns raised by the Committee regarding Director Penalty Notices and the capacity of victim-survivors experiencing financial abuse to respond to regulatory and tax obligations. Following the Government's consultation on options to address these issues, the ATO is progressing a number of changes to improve the defence pathways for director penalties for victim-survivors and meaningfully address concerns about the timeframes for seeking remission or lodging a defence.
The Government will continue to work with regulators, industry stakeholders, legal experts and victim-survivor advocates as it progresses these reforms. Through this work, the Government is committed to ensuring that tax and corporate systems do not facilitate financial abuse, appropriately support victim-survivors, and hold perpetrators accountable for debts and liabilities arising from their abusive conduct.
Recommendation 57
That the Australian Government undertake a review of current legislative and regulatory settings relating to trusts, with a view to addressing the abuse and misuse of trusts as a mechanism for financial abuse and coercive control.
Australian Government Response
The Government support this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises concerns that trust structures may, in some circumstances, be misused to facilitate financial abuse, conceal assets, avoid financial obligations, or exert coercive control over victim-survivors. The Government acknowledges the evidence presented to the Committee regarding the complexity of trust arrangements and the challenges that these arrangements can create for victim-survivors seeking to understand, access or protect their financial interests.
The Government agrees that it is important to ensure that legislative and regulatory frameworks do not inadvertently enable financial abuse or provide opportunities for perpetrators to misuse legal structures to cause financial harm.
This recommendation aligns with the Government's broader commitment to prevent perpetrators from using tax and corporate systems to create debts as a form of coercive control and to make perpetrators accountable for the financial harm they cause. As part of this work, the Government is considering the impacts of a range of mechanisms through which tax and corporate systems may be misused to facilitate financial abuse.
The Government will consider the issues raised by the Committee in the context of its broader work on financial abuse, systems abuse and the operation of tax and corporate structures. This will include engagement with relevant government agencies, regulators, legal experts, industry stakeholders and victim-survivor advocates to better understand the role trust arrangements may play in facilitating financial abuse and whether further action is warranted.
The Government notes that trusts are governed by a complex interaction of Commonwealth, state and territory laws, including trust law, property law, succession law, family law and taxation law. Any consideration of reforms in this area would therefore require close cooperation with state and territory governments and careful consideration of the broader legal framework within which trusts operate.
The Government remains committed to ensuring that legal, tax and corporate structures cannot be readily exploited as tools of financial abuse and coercive control, and that Commonwealth systems appropriately support victim-survivors and hold perpetrators accountable.
Recommendation 58
That the Australian Government amend the Social Security Act 1991 to:
1. remove the requirement that a person has to have left their home to qualify for crisis support payment;
2. lengthen the time in which a person has to apply for a crisis payment; and
3. ensure that a victim-survivor is not precluded from accessing a 'special circumstances' waiver if a perpetrator lies to Centrelink without the debtor's knowledge or consent, or the debtor makes a false statement or misrepresentation as a result of coercion or duress by a perpetrator.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports recommendations 58(1) and 58(2) in principle.
The Government supports recommendation 58(3).
The Government recognises the importance of ensuring that the social security system appropriately supports victim-survivors of family and domestic violence and does not create unnecessary barriers to accessing assistance or relief. The Government is committed to improving the safety of Commonwealth systems and reducing opportunities for financial abuse and systems abuse.
In relation to Recommendation 58(1), under section 1061JHA of the Social Security Act 1991 , a person who has experienced family and domestic violence, and who remains in their home after the perpetrator has left or been removed from the home, may already qualify for Crisis Payment, subject to meeting the other eligibility criteria. The Government therefore considers that the intent of this recommendation is substantially reflected in the current legislative framework.
In relation to Recommendation 58(2), the Government acknowledges the intent of providing victim-survivors with greater flexibility to access Crisis Payment. The Government notes that Services Australia's service delivery arrangements already provide flexibility in appropriate circumstances, including where a person experiencing family and domestic violence requires additional time to submit a claim.
The Government supports Recommendation 58(3) in full. This change was implemented through the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Act 2025 . The amendment ensures that victim-survivors are not precluded from accessing a special circumstances waiver where a perpetrator has provided false information to Services Australia without the person's knowledge or consent, or where a person has made a false statement or misrepresentation as a result of coercion or duress. The reform helps ensure that victim-survivors are not unfairly held responsible for debts arising from financial abuse and supports the Government's broader commitment to preventing perpetrators from exploiting Commonwealth systems to cause financial harm.
Recommendation 59
That the Australian Government establish a standing inter-departmental taskforce to oversee the implementation of safety-by-design principles into all government services.
Australian Government Response
The Government supports this recommendation.
The Government recognises the importance of embedding safety by design principles across Commonwealth systems and services to reduce opportunities for perpetrators to misuse government systems to facilitate financial abuse, coercive control and other forms of family and domestic violence.
The Government is already taking action to apply safety by design principles to the reform and design of government systems as part of its broader work to address systems abuse. This work has been informed by the Commonwealth Systems Abuse Audit, which identified opportunities to strengthen safety and prevent the weaponisation of government processes and services.
The Government considers that strong cross-government coordination is critical to ensuring a consistent and effective approach to implementing safety by design across Commonwealth systems. Accordingly, this work, together with the Government's broader audit of Commonwealth systems, is being overseen by the Secretaries Working Group on Gender-Based Violence, a sub-committee of the Australian Public Service Secretaries Board. The Working Group includes representatives from a range of Commonwealth departments and service delivery agencies and provides a mechanism for coordinating and driving system-wide reform.
Through this governance arrangement, the Government is progressing practical reforms to embed safety within government services, improve outcomes for victim-survivors, and prevent Commonwealth systems from being exploited as tools of financial abuse or coercive control. The Government will continue to work across portfolios to ensure safety by design principles are incorporated into the development, delivery and ongoing review of government services.
Recommendation 60
That all relevant government agencies provide training to frontline staff on the identification of domestic and family violence, including financial abuse, and require mandatory reporting of suspected financial abuse.
Australian Government Response
The Government support this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises the important role that frontline staff can play in identifying indicators of family and domestic violence, including financial abuse, and connecting individuals with appropriate support and services. Building workforce capability is an important component of the Government's broader efforts to improve responses to financial abuse and ensure Commonwealth systems are safe, accessible and responsive to victim-survivors.
A number of Commonwealth agencies, including Services Australia, the ATO, the Department of Veterans' Affairs and the National Disability Insurance Agency, already provide training and guidance to support staff to recognise and respond appropriately to family and domestic violence. The nature and scope of this training varies across agencies to reflect the differing roles, responsibility and service delivery models. These programs are designed to support staff to identify vulnerability, engage appropriately with customers and provide referrals to relevant supports and services.
The Government also notes that agencies continue to strengthen their responses to financial abuse. For example, Services Australia is developing specific training to assist staff to identify and appropriately respond to circumstances involving financial abuse and coercive control.
The Government will continue to support agencies to strengthen staff capability and improve responses to family and domestic violence, including financial abuse, as part of its broader work to embed safety across Commonwealth systems and prevent systems abuse.
Recommendation 61
That all relevant government entities providing frontline services establish dedicated teams with specialised training in domestic and family violence, including financial abuse.
Australian Government Response
The Government support this recommendation in principle.
The Government recognises the importance of ensuring that people experiencing family and domestic violence, including financial abuse, can access timely and appropriately tailored support when engaging with government services. Dedicated teams with specialised expertise can play an important role in identifying vulnerability, responding to complex circumstances and improving outcomes for victim-survivors.
A number of Commonwealth agencies already have dedicated frontline service teams with specialised expertise in family and domestic violence, including financial abuse. For example, Services Australia provides support through its social work service, which assists people affected by family and domestic violence through a national network of service centres, telephony services, online channels and outreach services, including mobile service centres.
The ATO also has specialist teams that provide support to people experiencing, or at risk of experiencing vulnerability, including family and domestic violence, including where abuse has affected a person's tax affairs or financial circumstances.
The Government acknowledges the value of specialist expertise in supporting victim-survivors and notes that agencies have different functions, service delivery responsibilities and operating models. Accordingly, the most appropriate approach to supporting people experiencing family and domestic violence may vary across agencies.
The Government will continue to work with Commonwealth agencies to strengthen capability, improve frontline responses and ensure service delivery arrangements appropriately support people experiencing family and domestic violence, including financial abuse, as part of its broader efforts to embed safety across government systems and services.
Emerging issues and areas for ongoing consideration
The Government recognises that the Committee's report made an important contribution to understanding the prevalence, impacts and drivers of financial abuse in Australia and provided a comprehensive framework for strengthening protections for victim-survivors. The Government also acknowledges that financial abuse is not static. As government systems, financial products and service delivery models evolve, new risks can emerge and existing forms of abuse can manifest in different ways. The Government therefore considers it important that efforts to address financial abuse extend beyond the specific recommendations contained in the report and remain responsive to emerging evidence, stakeholder engagement and lived experience.
Since the Committee tabled its report, the Government has continued to engage with victim-survivors, advocacy organisations, regulators, industry participants and the Parliament through its broader work on financial abuse, systems abuse and family and domestic violence. Through these engagements, several additional issues have been identified which, while not specifically addressed by the Committee's recommendations, raise similar concerns regarding the misuse of legal, financial and administrative systems to exercise control, undermine autonomy, create economic harm or exacerbate vulnerability.
These issues highlight the broad range of settings in which financial abuse can occur and reinforce the importance of applying the principles underpinning this Government Response across a wider ecosystem of institutions and systems. Common themes include the potential misuse of positions of authority, information asymmetries, barriers to informed decision-making, inadequate recognition of vulnerability, and the need for systems and services to be designed and operated in ways that promote safety, dignity and economic security
The Government considers the following matters to be areas warranting ongoing attention and engagement as part of the broader body of work focused on financial abuse, coercive control, systems abuse and economic wellbeing.
Public trustees, guardianship arrangements and financial autonomy
The Government recognises stakeholder concerns regarding the operation of public trustee and substitute decision-making arrangements, particularly in circumstances where individuals may have limited capacity to independently manage their financial affairs. Stakeholders have noted that public trustees can exercise significant authority over a person's financial and property interests, including decisions relating to investments, property transactions, contractual arrangements and other financial matters.
Recent stakeholder advocacy has highlighted concerns regarding the adequacy of safeguards that apply to public trustee arrangements and whether existing mechanisms consistently support the rights, preferences and autonomy of individuals whose affairs are managed by a trustee or guardian. Concerns raised by stakeholders include the impact of trustee fees and charges on long-term financial wellbeing, questions regarding consultation and participation in decision-making, and the broader management of financial affairs on behalf of vulnerable individuals
The Government notes that these concerns have also been raised in the context of Commonwealth legislation. In June 2026, Senator Lidia Thorpe proposed amendments to the Treasury Laws Amendment (Delivering an Efficient and Trusted Tax System) Bill 2026 which would have inserted new duties applying to trustees and directors of self-managed superannuation funds acting on behalf of members under a legal disability or pursuant to an enduring power of attorney. The proposed amendment sought to require decision-makers to act in accordance with a set of principles, including respecting the rights, will and preferences of the member, avoiding conflicts of interest and undue influence, acting proportionately to the person's circumstances, and being subject to complaints and review mechanisms. The amendment was intended, in part, to reflect principles contained in Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
The Government acknowledges that the proposal reflects broader stakeholder concerns regarding the exercise of financial decision-making powers on behalf of people experiencing vulnerability, including where public trustees, attorneys or other substitute decision-makers are involved. While responsibility for guardianship, administration and public trustee frameworks primarily rests with state and territory governments, the issues raised through this proposal are relevant to the Government's broader consideration of financial abuse, economic exploitation, supported decision-making and the safeguards that apply where one person is authorised to make financial decisions on behalf of another.
The Government also acknowledges stakeholder views regarding the particular experiences of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples who may be subject to public trustee arrangements, including calls for approaches that emphasise informed consent, participation and self-determination.
The Government will continue to engage with stakeholders, including people with lived experience, disability advocates, First Nations organisations and relevant jurisdictions, to better understand whether additional safeguards, oversight mechanisms or legislative responses are required to ensure that financial management arrangements appropriately protect individual rights, autonomy and financial security while reducing opportunities for abuse, exploitation or undue influence.
Financial abuse within corporate, insolvency and external administration systems
The Government also notes emerging stakeholder concerns regarding the intersection between financial abuse and Australia's corporate, insolvency and external administration frameworks. Evidence gathered through broader engagement on financial abuse has highlighted that corporate structures, business arrangements and insolvency processes may, in some circumstances, be used to facilitate or perpetuate coercive control and financial harm.
The Government recognises that insolvency practitioners, corporate regulators and other participants in the corporate system may encounter circumstances involving family and domestic violence, financial abuse and coerced participation in corporate activities. These issues may arise in the context of company management, business ownership arrangements, corporate liabilities, insolvency proceedings or the misuse of legal and regulatory processes.
Stakeholder engagement has highlighted the importance of ensuring that professionals operating within the corporate and insolvency system are equipped to identify indicators of financial abuse and understand the ways in which perpetrators may utilise business and corporate structures to cause economic harm. The Government notes that ASIC has encouraged liquidators to be mindful of the signs of family and domestic violence issues within the insolvency profession and continues to engage in broader policy discussions relating to coerced directorships and financial abuse.
These issues complement the Government's existing work to address coerced directorships and the misuse of tax and corporate systems to create debts and liabilities as a form of coercive control. They also reinforce a broader lesson emerging from the Committee's inquiry: that financial abuse can occur through systems that were not originally designed with family and domestic violence considerations in mind.
The Government will continue to engage with regulators, insolvency practitioners, industry bodies and victim-survivor advocates to better understand how corporate and insolvency frameworks interact with financial abuse and whether further opportunities exist to strengthen safeguards and improve responses within these systems.
Insurance responses to trauma associated with domestic, family and sexual violence
The Government further notes concerns raised by victim-survivor advocates regarding the treatment of trauma arising from domestic, family and sexual violence within insurance and superannuation insurance settings. Stakeholders have argued that existing underwriting, risk assessment and claims management practices may not always appropriately recognise the unique circumstances of victim-survivors who experience psychological injury or trauma as a consequence of violence perpetrated against them.
In particular, stakeholders have raised concerns that trauma-related mental health conditions arising from domestic, family and sexual violence may, in some cases, be considered as pre-existing conditions for the purposes of insurance coverage decisions. Stakeholders contend that such approaches can affect access to insurance products or entitlements and may create additional barriers for victim-survivors seeking financial security and recovery following experiences of violence. These concerns have been raised across a range of insurance settings, including income protection, total and permanent disability insurance and workers' compensation arrangements.
The Government recognises that victim-survivors should not be placed in a position where seeking support or treatment for trauma creates concerns regarding future access to insurance products or services. The Government also acknowledges stakeholder concerns that insurance settings which are perceived as punitive or discriminatory may discourage disclosure, treatment-seeking or engagement with support services.
Stakeholders have proposed a range of responses, including greater adoption of trauma-informed approaches, enhanced workforce training, consideration of anti-discrimination principles and closer collaboration between insurers and victim-survivor advocacy organisations. Industry participants and advocacy organisations have also commenced broader discussions regarding how insurance products, underwriting frameworks and claims processes can better reflect the realities of trauma and recovery.
These issues are closely aligned with the Committee's recommendations concerning the role of the insurance sector in preventing and responding to financial abuse. They also reinforce the importance of ensuring that financial products and services support, rather than undermine, the recovery, independence and long-term economic security of victim-survivors.
Continuing engagement and future reform
The Committee's report has reinforced the importance of addressing financial abuse as a whole-of-system issue. The recommendations contained in this report, together with the emerging issues identified since the report was tabled, demonstrate that financial abuse can occur across a broad range of financial, legal and administrative settings and is often interconnected with family and domestic violence, elder abuse, disability-related exploitation, systems abuse and other forms of coercive control.
The Government's response to the Committee's recommendations forms part of a broader program of work to strengthen protections against financial abuse, embed safety by design across government systems and services, and improve outcomes for victim-survivors. This work includes implementing the Government's commitments arising from the Commonwealth Systems Abuse Audit, progressing reforms to prevent the misuse of tax and corporate systems as tools of coercive control, strengthening responses to financial abuse within child support and taxation systems, and advancing the objectives of the National Plan to End Violence Against Women and Children 2022-2032 and Working for Women: A National Strategy for Gender Equality .
The Government recognises that the issues examined by the Committee do not exist in isolation. Emerging concerns relating to public trustee arrangements, substitute decision-making frameworks, corporate and insolvency processes, and insurance practices highlight that many of the same underlying risks identified by the Committee including misuse of authority, barriers to financial autonomy, inadequate safeguards for vulnerable individuals and opportunities for systems to be weaponised can arise across a range of settings.
Accordingly, the Government will continue to consider these issues alongside implementation of the Committee's recommendations and broader reforms to address financial abuse and systems abuse. The Government will work across portfolios, regulators and sectors to identify common themes, share lessons from reform initiatives and ensure that responses remain informed by emerging evidence, stakeholder perspectives and lived experience.
The Government recognises that preventing financial abuse requires more than reforming individual programs or institutions. It requires ongoing efforts to ensure that financial, legal and administrative systems are designed and operated in ways that support safety, autonomy, informed decision-making and economic security. The Government will continue to engage with victim-survivors, advocacy organisations, industry, regulators, academics, state and territory governments and other stakeholders to identify opportunities to strengthen protections, improve accountability and reduce opportunities for exploitation across systems.
Through implementation of this response, and through its broader work to prevent family and domestic violence and systems abuse, the Government will continue to pursue a coordinated and evidence-based approach that recognises the interconnected nature of these issues and supports the safety, dignity, autonomy and financial wellbeing of all Australians.
[1] Australian Bureau of Statistics,Partner violence , released 22 November 2023.
[2] Australian Retail Credit Association, 2026, available at: www.arca.asn.au.
That the Senate take note of the document.
Customs and Other Legislation Amendment (Illicit Tobacco Enforcement Modernisation and Other Measures) Bill 2026
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
CUSTOMS AND OTHER LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (ILLICIT TOBACCO ENFORCEMENT MODERNISATION AND OTHER MEASURES) BILL 2026
This Customs and Other Legislation Amendment (Illicit Tobacco Enforcement Modernisation and Other Measures) Bill is the next step in the Government's ongoing crackdown on the criminals behind the illicit tobacco and vapes trade.
This legislation delivers the most comprehensive modernisation of Australia's illicit tobacco customs enforcement framework since 2018, ensuring laws designed for a different illicit tobacco market keep pace with increasingly sophisticated criminal enterprises.
Illicit tobacco is not a victimless crime. It undermines public health objectives, harms legitimate businesses, deprives governments of revenue and provides a significant source of profit for organised criminal groups.
Illicit tobacco is being fuelled by two things: a massive surplus of cheap global production, which has been weaponised by transnational serious organised criminals.
Think of these syndicates as akin to multinational businesses. They're sophisticated, big players. They're commodity agnostic—they just want to make money.
They don't care whether it's meth, tobacco, Gucci handbags, wildlife or human trafficking. They just want to make money.
And they're flooding national borders around the world with dirt cheap tobacco that can be produced for less than a dollar a packet, targeting countries regardless of their public health or excise policies.
As we go after these crooks, it's important to remember that despite everything they are chucking at our country, trying to get our kids hooked on nicotine and vapes, the gold-standard data released last month by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare shows that smoking rates in our country have continued to fall.
Fewer Australians are smoking than ever, and vaping rates have stabilised. Smoking has reached record lows, now down to 5.8% amongst adults.
Holding onto these hard-won gains remains our most important public health challenge, as smoking remains the leading cause of preventable disease in Australia and still represents 20 per cent of our nation's cancer burden. 66 Australians die every day of a smoking-related illness. And, two in three long-term smokers will die of a smoking-related illness.
This Bill follows the passage last sitting week of the Combatting Illicit Tobacco Bill which raised penalties, opened up new law enforcement techniques and updated proceeds of crime laws.
This Bill builds on that work, further raising the stakes for the criminals.
For too long, organised crime has seen tobacco as 'high profit low risk'. This Bill will help to reverse that equation, making it easier to disrupt this trade, prosecute criminals who import, convey or possess illicit tobacco and take their profits and gains.
There are two overarching elements to these reforms.
Firstly, this Bill will modernise Australia's illicit tobacco enforcement framework to increase deterrence, strengthen supply chain integrity and support more effective enforcement action, while having minimal regulatory impact on legitimate businesses.
A central reform is the creation of new offences for importing, possessing and conveying illicit tobacco.
Current tobacco offences often require prosecutors to prove that tobacco has been imported by a person with intent to defraud the revenue .
The prosecution must demonstrate that the person was aware that tobacco is subject to a duty collection framework and that duty must be paidon importation .
As a result, these offences are routinely frustrated because criminals have adapted by distancing themselves from the border and the importation process, where direct evidence of intent or knowledge is rarely available.
These offences were designed for another era with low level criminals trying to defraud a bit of revenue.
Today, the scale, complexity and sophistication of organised crime groups demands a new approach to going after the criminals—anyone involved—in the illicit tobacco trade.
The new offence framework focuses on the unlawful conduct itself and better reflects the realities of modern illicit tobacco offending.
It will make it easier to hold those involved in illicit tobacco operations accountable, and improve the ability of law enforcement agencies to pursue serious offenders.
To explain, the new law contains a list of "observable indicators" of illicit activity. If any one of these indicators is established, then that is taken to satisfy the reasonable suspicion test of the criminal offence.
The reasonable suspicion under these new laws is an objective test—it does not depend on what an officer or anyone suspects. This allows enforcement agencies to focus on observable facts rather than trying to prove every detail of a concealed illicit supply chain.
Examples of the new objective circumstances include:
This will be a powerful tool for the Australian Border Force and all State and Territory Police forces to go after serious and organised crime.
Indeed anyone involved in the illegal tobacco and vape trade is on notice.
If the ABF or state/territory law enforcement agencies enter a retail premises and establish any of those facts, then action can be taken.
The focus will be on using the new offences to go after serious criminals. But to be clear, it will also now be easier for law enforcement to target those operating retail businesses that possess illicit tobacco.
Companies and corporations may also be targeted because offences apply generally to a "person", and under Commonwealth law a person includes a corporation (section 2C of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901).
This means a tobacconist company, warehouse company or distributor company may be investigated and prosecuted.
ANYONE involved in the illegal tobacco and vapes trade—whether high up in the crime groups, mid-level operatives, distributors or those running and working in the shops—would be wise to get a new job and do so quickly.
At the same time, the Bill introduces stronger consequences for the most serious forms of offending, ensuring that organised criminals engaging in conduct at the most serious end of the spectrum receive sentences that appropriately reflect the gravity of their offending.
Together, these reforms make the consequences real and the deterrent credible.
The Bill also helps reinforce the seriousness with which Australia treats prohibited tobacco imports. Criminal groups should not be able to avoid meaningful consequences simply because enforcement is focussed on the complex question of duty evasion, rather than the more clear-cut, common-sense questions of unlawful importation and possession.
These reforms will support the more consistent treatment of illicit tobacco alongside other high risk prohibited goods and enable enforcement responses that better reflect the harms associated with this trade.
The Bill also closes an important legislative loophole affecting tobacco upon which customs duty has been paid and for which a refund of that duty is available under the Customs Acts.
This is defined in the Bill as duty-refundable tobacco. Duty-refundable tobacco is tobacco supplied to duty-free operators for export or for sale to eligible travellers within their duty-free concession.
However, under the current framework, this tobacco is not subject to customs control. This creates opportunities for diversion into the black market at duty-free prices.
The Bill restores customs control over duty-refundable tobacco until it is exported or sold to an eligible traveller. This will reduce opportunities for diversion and ensure appropriate oversight of these products throughout the supply chain.
For legitimate duty-free operators, these reforms largely formalise existing expectations and practices and little will change. This Bill is aimed at closing a regulatory gap and strengthening accountability, not imposing unnecessary new burdens on businesses that already handle these products responsibly.
The Bill also streamlines the seizure and disposal of illicit tobacco. The volume of illicit tobacco being detected by the Australian Border Force has increased significantly in recent years, yet seizure processes remain heavily administrative and resource-intensive.
Officers can spend hours documenting and processing individual seizure notices. This valuable operational time could instead be devoted to stopping illicit drugs, weapons and other dangerous goods from entering Australia.
These reforms will enable faster and more efficient seizure and disposal processes. The Bill will also ensure that tobacco imported in breach of importation permit conditions can be dealt with as swiftly and decisively as tobacco imported without a permit. It will also prevent criminal actors from exploiting existing claim and notification processes to delay enforcement action and frustrate the disposal of illicit tobacco.
Finally, the Bill strengthens integrity across the customs supply chain. Illicit tobacco operations often rely upon facilitators who provide access to storage facilities, freight networks, depots and other supply chain infrastructure while maintaining an appearance of legitimacy. Existing administrative arrangements do not always provide sufficiently strong or consistent tools to address this behaviour.
The Bill introduces additional licensing conditions for customs brokers, depots and warehouses—critical intermediaries and actors in the supply and logistics chain.
This will require licence holders to refrain from conduct that facilitates, assists or enables the importation of prohibited tobacco products, conduct that is inconsistent with another condition of the licence or that contravenes a law of the Commonwealth; and for the licence holder to take all reasonable steps to prevent such conduct occurring within their operations.
The Bill will also uplift existing tobacco-related licensing obligations for licence holders into the statute. It also renames and expands the remit of the National Customs Broker Licensing Advisory Committee to include applications for depot and warehouse licences.
This will create a more consistent, robust approach to oversight, licensing integrity and compliance across the customs supply chain, enhancing integrity and ensuring that legitimate operators are not disadvantaged by those who choose to facilitate illicit tobacco activity.
Taken together, these reforms strengthen offences, tighten controls over the tobacco supply chain, elevate the seriousness with which prohibited tobacco activity is treated, improve enforcement outcomes, and increase accountability across critical points of the importation process.
Second, the Bill strengthens Australia's proceeds of crime framework to ensure that criminal groups cannot retain the financial benefits generated from unlawful activity.
Prosecutions should be pursued where they can be. Tobacco should be seized and destroyed when it is found. But these alone are not enough.
Organised crime is ultimately driven by profit. What we know really hurts these criminal syndicates is to take their cash, their cars, their houses, their boats and their toys.
To achieve a lasting deterrent effect, law enforcement agencies must also be able to recover the profits and wealth generated by criminal activity. .So this Bill strengthens the ability of agencies to strip criminals of the profits they are making from their illegal activities.
Pecuniary penalty orders are a key tool in achieving that outcome. They require offenders to repay the financial benefits derived from criminal activity, helping to ensure that crime does not pay.
The Bill strengthens the pecuniary penalty order framework by clarifying how these benefits are calculated, ensuring that penalty amounts are reduced only in appropriate circumstances, and enabling restrained property to be used more effectively to satisfy court-ordered penalties.
These reforms will reduce legal uncertainty, improve the efficiency of confiscation proceedings and help ensure that the financial gains derived from criminal conduct are recovered more effectively.
The Bill also updates the production order framework, which is an important mechanism used by law enforcement agencies to obtain information relevant to proceeds of crime investigations. The reforms clarify the operation of existing powers, strengthen offences for interference with production order processes and improve the ability of authorities to obtain production orders across jurisdictions.
This will make investigations more efficient and ensure that law enforcement agencies can continue to access information needed to pursue criminal assets.
Finally, the Bill strengthens Australia's unexplained wealth framework by clarifying the methodology used to calculate a person's total wealth. These amendments will improve the operation of the framework and support a more realistic assessment of a person's 'total wealth', while ensuring it captures property owned or controlled by a person at any time.
Together, these proceeds of crime reforms will better equip law enforcement agencies to identify, restrain and recover the financial rewards that make organised criminal activity attractive in the first place.
Conclusion
This Bill comes at a time when the illicit tobacco trade plied by organised criminal syndicates continues to grow in sophistication. These reforms are practical and targeted and focus on the problematic elements of the sector. They modernise Australia's illicit tobacco enforcement framework, strengthen supply chain integrity, improve operational effectiveness and ensure that organised criminal groups face stronger consequences for their conduct.
Just as importantly, they strengthen our ability to pursue the proceeds, instruments and benefits generated by criminal activity and deny organised crime the financial rewards that drive this trade.
As a whole, this Bill helps to protect Australia's borders, support legitimate businesses, strengthen public confidence in the integrity of our regulatory systems and ensure that nefarious criminal groups cannot exploit weaknesses in our legislative frameworks.
These reforms form an important part of the nation's overarching approach to combatting illicit tobacco.
Action is being ramped up pre-border, at-border and post-border.
The best container of illegal tobacco is one that never reaches our shores or passes the border, the Australian Border Force is achieving record levels of disruption offshore and seizures at the border.
The most urgent area for action is post-border.
Above all else Australians need the States and Territories to shut the sleazy illegal shops—indeed any retail outlet—flogging illegal tobacco.
Australians would not put up with a meth lab in the middle of their local strip shops, and neither should they put up with these crooks trying to get their kids hooked on nicotine.
I acknowledge the nation leading work of Queensland and South Australia to disrupt the illegal tobacco and vapes trade.
The Government is working with and supporting all jurisdictions to overhaul their laws, scale up enforcement and shut the shops.
Frankly, the big states have been too slow to act, but I acknowledge action is now happening which is welcome. Victoria's new laws took effect this week and as of this week they are closing illegal shops.
These laws will make it easier for all jurisdictions to go after any business involved in this trade, including servos, barbers, clothing stores, restaurants and all manner of outlets.
It is a disgrace that the Coalition has decided to get into bed with One Nation, Big Tobacco and criminal syndicates to create insane policies to let vapes rip and make money from taxing them as that market grows. This will drive up smoking and kill untold numbers of Australians.
Nevertheless, I urge all members of this House, and the other place, to support the swift passage of this Bill so our law enforcement officials have the powers they need and have asked for, to go after the crooks at pace.
I commend the Bill to the House.