National Bill Board

Environmental Legislation Amendment (Plastic Reduction and Container Recycling) Bill 2026

NSW Government legislation making extensive changes across seven environmental Acts as part of the NSW Plastics Plan 2.0 and reforms to the Return and Earn container-deposit scheme. The legislation expands restrictions on single-use plastics and balloon releases, introduces requirements concerning reusable cups, strengthens record-keeping and information-gathering powers, changes container-deposit requirements and expands EPA regulatory and enforcement powers. Takeaway businesses can be required to accept reusable cups supplied by customers and, under specified schemes, offer reusable alternatives. The legislation also creates substantial record-keeping obligations for takeaway businesses and suppliers. Authorised officers may require prescribed information and documents, while failure to prepare, retain or provide specified records can attract significant and continuing penalties. The legislation also expands circumstances in which information collected under environmental laws may be disclosed to other government agencies.

Sections: Schedule 1 — Contaminated Land Management Act amendments, including information-disclosure provisions. Schedule 3 — Pesticides Act amendments, including information-disclosure provisions. Schedule 4 — Plastic Reduction and Circular Economy Act amendments. ss 35A–35C — record keeping, compulsory information and disclosure requirements. ss 34B–34C — reusable-cup requirements. s 36A — compliance notices relating to reusable-cup requirements. s 61 and s 68 — exemption and regulation-making powers. Schedule 6 — Protection of the Environment Operations Act amendments. Schedule 7 — Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Act amendments and container-deposit scheme reforms. Proposed s 56A — regulation-making power allowing exemptions from specified statutory requirements.

ROAN Pillar 5 — privacy / personal and business information / individual rights. ROAN Pillar 8 — regulatory power / delegated legislation / government accountability. Secondary relevance to Pillar 9 — environmental resources / waste and recycling policy. The environmental objectives are legitimate. Plastic pollution, landfill capacity and recycling failures are genuine issues requiring government attention. However, the legislation contains considerably more than bans on plastic items. The NSW Legislation Review Committee identified concerns involving privacy, strict-liability and continuing offences, broad delegation and substantial regulatory powers. The information-disclosure provisions are particularly worth noting. Information obtained in administering environmental legislation may be disclosed in a broad range of circumstances, including to other NSW agencies, Commonwealth or interstate agencies and in circumstances later prescribed by regulation. The Committee noted that the legislation does not necessarily restrict those disclosure provisions to narrowly defined categories of information. The legislation also creates substantial record-keeping obligations. Under s 35A, relevant businesses and suppliers may be required to prepare prescribed records, retain them for at least six years and make them available for inspection and copying. Failure to comply can attract substantial penalties, including additional daily penalties while the contravention continues. Section 35B allows authorised officers to require production of information and documents. A further issue is the amount of practical detail left to later regulations. The legislation contains several powers allowing regulations or regulator-granted exemptions to alter how statutory requirements apply. Some of those provisions were identified as Henry VIII clauses because delegated legislation can modify or exempt the operation of requirements contained in the Act itself. The legislation also permits EPA functions to be delegated to persons belonging to classes later prescribed by regulation. For FERM, the issue is not opposition to recycling or reduction of plastic pollution. It is the continuing legislative pattern of placing substantial information-gathering, penalty, exemption and rule-making powers inside regulatory legislation while leaving important details to the Executive after the primary Act has passed Parliament. That makes this worth tracking not simply as environmental policy, but as another example of how much practical law is increasingly being made through regulations, exemptions and delegated administrative power rather than directly by Parliament. Passed — Parliament passed the Bill on 22 October 2026. Royal Assent 28 October 2026. Act No. 52 of 2026.

Agriculture Legislation Amendment (Biosecurity and Export Control) Bill 2026

The Bill would amend the Biosecurity Act 2015 and the Export Control Act 2020 to: harmonise and update the fit and proper person tests that apply under the Biosecurity Act and Export Control Act; and provide for additional investigation powers relating to the search and seizure of electronic equipment.

Sections: s542 Biosecurity Act 2015 and s288 Export Control Act 2020

Road Transport Amendment (Non-registrable Motor Vehicles) Bill 2026

NSW Government legislation creating new seizure, impounding, surrender, inspection and disposal powers for certain motor vehicles that cannot be registered. A police officer or other authorised officer may seize a vehicle where the officer reasonably suspects that it is a non-registrable motor vehicle and that somebody used it on a road, road-related area or public place during the previous 28 days. Importantly, ownership of a non-registrable vehicle is not itself unlawful. The legislation also allows officers to issue surrender notices requiring a person to hand over a suspected non-registrable vehicle. A person seeking return of an impounded vehicle must apply within the statutory period and establish specified matters concerning ownership and who was responsible for the suspected use. The legislation also limits liability of the Crown and specified officials for damage to, or theft of, vehicles arising from seizure, impounding, surrender or inspection.

Sections: s 79A — seizure and impounding of suspected non-registrable motor vehicles. s 79B — applications for return, forfeiture and disposal of seized or surrendered vehicles. s 255A — surrender notices. s 255B — stopping and inspection powers. s 255C — exclusion of liability for damage or theft arising from seizure, impounding, surrender or inspection. s 255D — fees for movement, towing, storage and disposal. s 279C — statutory review of the amendments.

ROAN Pillar 5 — property rights / individual rights. ROAN Pillar 7 — procedural fairness / burden of proof / review rights. ROAN Pillar 8 — police and regulatory power / delegated legislation / government accountability. This is worth recording because the legislation permits legal private property to be seized and potentially disposed of even though merely owning the vehicle is not itself an offence. Section 79A operates where an authorised officer has a reasonable suspicion that the vehicle is non-registrable and was used on a road or public place during the previous 28 days. The NSW Legislation Review Committee specifically raised the effect of this power on property rights. There is also a procedural-fairness issue surrounding return of the vehicle. A person seeking its return must establish specified facts, including ownership and circumstances concerning who used the vehicle. The Committee identified this as involving a reverse onus of proof. Section 255C is also significant because it provides that no action lies against the Crown, Minister, Commissioner of Police, Transport for NSW or specified officers for damage to or theft of a vehicle arising from seizure, impounding, surrender or inspection. Another unusual issue involves children. A surrender notice can in specified circumstances be issued to a person under 16 years old where a parent or guardian cannot reasonably be located. Failure to comply can constitute an offence carrying a maximum penalty of 30 penalty units, with the legislation also providing for a penalty-notice regime. The Legislation Review Committee specifically raised concern that minors may not understand their ability to challenge a penalty notice in court. Important parts of the process are also left to regulations, including the internal review process for unsuccessful applications to recover vehicles and fees for towing, storage and disposal. For FERM, the issue is not whether unsafe or illegal vehicle use should be controlled. It is whether seizure and disposal of lawful private property, reverse evidentiary burdens, liability protections for government and penalties capable of applying to minors are accompanied by adequate procedural safeguards. Passed — Parliament passed the Bill on 28 May 2026. Royal Assent 1 June 2026. Act No. 13 of 2026.

Australia’s Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Amendment Bill 2026

Federal Government legislation substantially amending Australia’s foreign-arrangements framework applying to States and Territories, councils, public universities and specified foreign entities. The legislation replaces parts of the existing “foreign relations” test with a broader “national interest” test. It expands information-sharing arrangements, changes notification requirements, allows greater delegation of Ministerial functions and permits the Foreign Minister to impose, vary or revoke conditions relating to foreign arrangements. The Minister may impose conditions on negotiations for core foreign arrangements and on how both core and non-core foreign arrangements are given effect. The Act also extends the framework to overseas campuses of Australian public universities and requires Australian universities to maintain policies and procedures for identifying foreign research projects and assessing whether those projects adversely affect Australia’s national interest or conflict with Australian foreign policy. It also makes changes relating to ASIO advice and review arrangements.

Sections: Schedule 1 Part 1 — replacement of specified “foreign relations” tests with the broader “national interest” test. Schedule 1 Part 2 — information-sharing framework. Schedule 1 items 58–64 — conditions relating to core foreign arrangements. s 29B — conditions on giving effect to core foreign arrangements. s 38B — conditions on giving effect to non-core foreign arrangements. s 55A — Australian university policies and procedures concerning foreign research projects. s 63A — periodic statutory review. Schedule 1 items 92–94 — ASIO Act amendments relating to prescribed administrative action.

ROAN Pillar 1 — foreign affairs / treaty and foreign-arrangement oversight / Commonwealth-State relations. ROAN Pillar 5 — institutional and individual rights / information. ROAN Pillar 8 — Ministerial discretion / information sharing / executive accountability. There is a legitimate national-security and foreign-policy objective behind the legislation. State governments, councils and public universities can enter arrangements involving foreign governments or foreign-controlled entities, and it is reasonable for the Commonwealth to ensure those arrangements do not undermine national policy or security. The accountability issue is the breadth of the amended framework. The legislation moves from the narrower concept of Australia’s “foreign relations” toward the broader “national interest”, without inserting a comprehensive statutory definition of that term. The Foreign Minister also receives powers to impose, vary or revoke conditions governing negotiations and the operation of foreign arrangements. Those conditions can apply during the life of an arrangement rather than only when it is first approved. The legislation additionally expands information sharing and allows information obtained through the scheme to be disclosed to other Commonwealth entities for specified governmental purposes. The review framework is also worth watching. Certain decisions and associated ASIO advice are excluded from some ordinary administrative-review mechanisms, although constitutional and other judicial-review avenues remain. For ROAN, this is particularly relevant to Pillar 1 because it provides a real current example of how Australia manages foreign arrangements made below Commonwealth level. The question is whether protecting Australia’s national interest is matched by sufficiently precise definitions, transparent reasons, effective review and appropriate parliamentary scrutiny when substantial discretion is placed in the hands of the Foreign Minister and Executive government. Passed — Royal Assent 26 August 2026. Act No. 80 of 2026. In force.

Aged Care Amendment (Restoring Human Override for Aged Care Needs Assessments) Bill 2026 — motion to consider second reading immediately

This entry relates to a House of Representatives procedural division on 11 August 2026, not a final vote on the Bill itself. The underlying Bill would amend the Aged Care Act 2024 to make clear that an approved aged-care needs assessor may exercise professional discretion and is not bound by the Integrated Assessment Tool or requirements prescribed by the Aged Care Rules. The Bill had already passed the Senate and was introduced into the House on 11 August. After introduction, Government Minister Rebecca White moved that the second reading be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Dan Tehan moved an amendment seeking to have the second reading considered immediately instead. That amendment was defeated 42–87. Kristy McBain voted NO. This therefore must not be recorded as “Kristy voted against human override” or “Kristy voted against the Bill”. Her recorded vote was against the proposal to bring the Bill on for immediate second-reading consideration. The Bill itself remains before the House of Representatives.

Sections: Underlying Bill — Aged Care Act 2024, particularly ss 62, 76 and 79 concerning needs assessments and assessment arrangements. The 11 August division itself concerned parliamentary scheduling of the second reading, not an amendment to those substantive provisions.

ROAN Pillar 5 — aged-care rights / human decision-making. ROAN Pillar 8 — automated government decision-making / accountability. The underlying Bill is highly relevant to FERM because it addresses whether automated or standardised assessment tools should assist human decision-makers or effectively determine outcomes. The Bill seeks to preserve professional discretion for aged-care assessors rather than requiring them to follow the outcome produced by the Integrated Assessment Tool. Kristy McBain’s recorded vote on 11 August 2026 was procedural only. She voted against an amendment seeking immediate consideration of the Bill’s second reading; she did not vote against the human-override provisions themselves. For FERM, the substantive issue remains worth watching: whether human professional judgement is preserved in government assessment systems, and how Kristy votes if the Bill later reaches a substantive division.

Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Amendment (Enforcement and Operational Powers) Bill 2026

NSW Government bill substantially updating animal-cruelty offences, penalties and enforcement powers under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1979. The Bill creates new offences, increases penalties for existing offences and modernises enforcement powers available to NSW Police and approved animal-welfare inspectors. Several of the new offences are strict-liability offences carrying possible imprisonment. For example, proposed s 7A(2) prohibits leaving a dog unattended in a vehicle for more than 10 minutes unless the vehicle is adequately cooled. An individual may face a maximum penalty of 400 penalty units, one year imprisonment, or both. Proposed s 7A(3) creates the same maximum penalty for restraining a dog on the metal tray of an open-backed vehicle without adequate insulating material. Proposed s 10(5) creates an offence for tethering an animal for more than two hours without ensuring adequate access to clean water, carrying up to six months imprisonment for an individual. Other provisions deal with animal operations, pain relief, seized animals and regulatory enforcement.

Sections: Proposed s 7A(2) — dog unattended in inadequately cooled vehicle. Proposed s 7A(3) — dog restrained on open-backed vehicle without adequate insulation. Proposed s 10(5) — tethering without sufficient access to clean water. Proposed s 21BA — specified pain-relief requirements for mulesing sheep. Proposed s 24QC — restrictions relating to acquisition of seized stock animals. Schedule 1 [63]–[64] — expanded and updated regulation-making powers.

ROAN Pillar 5 — individual rights / property / personal liability. ROAN Pillar 7 — criminal liability / procedural safeguards. ROAN Pillar 8 — regulatory and enforcement powers / government accountability. Preventing cruelty to animals is a legitimate and important objective, and the Bill contains reforms aimed at conduct that can plainly cause animals serious harm. The issue for FERM is the use of strict-liability offences carrying imprisonment. Strict liability reduces or removes the ordinary requirement for the prosecution to establish a fault element such as intention, knowledge or recklessness. That becomes particularly significant when the possible consequence is not simply a fine but imprisonment. The Legislation Review Committee specifically drew Parliament’s attention to this issue. For example, the proposed vehicle provision can carry up to one year imprisonment even though the offence is structured as strict liability. The broader question is therefore proportionality: whether conduct deserving criminal sanction has been defined clearly enough, whether appropriate defences remain available and whether custodial penalties should attach to strict-liability regulatory offences. This is worth watching both for animal-welfare outcomes and for the precedent of increasingly attaching imprisonment to offences where the ordinary mental element of criminal responsibility is reduced or absent. Watching — currently in the NSW Legislative Council at second-reading stage.

Justice Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous) Bill (No 2) 2026

NSW Government legislation amending around two dozen laws across the justice system. Despite the word “Miscellaneous” in the title, the Bill contained several substantial changes involving youth bail, sentencing, correctional powers, forensic patients, victims, privacy, law-enforcement powers and terrorism-related detention provisions. It extends the special youth bail test in s 22C of the Bail Act until April 2028. It also changes the law relating to certain life sentences and removes some avenues for offenders subject to non-release recommendations to seek Supreme Court inquiry or review. Other amendments allow correctional and juvenile justice officers transporting forensic patients to exercise correctional powers during those transfers, including powers involving force, restraints and searches. The legislation also provides a clearer basis for sharing personal and health information with the Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, permanently authorises body-worn cameras for operational sheriff’s officers and extends certain preventative-detention provisions under terrorism legislation. The NSW Legislation Review Committee referred several matters to Parliament concerning liberty, the presumption of innocence, retrospective operation, forensic patients and arbitrary detention.

Sections: Schedule 1.1 [2] — Bail Act 2013, s 22C — extension of special youth bail provisions to 4 April 2028. Schedule 1.7 — Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 — review and inquiry provisions concerning specified non-release life sentences. Schedule 1.9 [3] — Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 — life-sentence redetermination provisions. Schedule 1.13 and Schedule 1.20 — Health Records and Information Privacy Act 2002 and Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 — information sharing with BOCSAR. Schedule 1.17 [1]–[5] — Mental Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 — transportation of forensic patients and correctional powers. Schedule 1.5 and Schedule 1.22 — permanent body-worn-video authority for operational sheriff’s officers.

ROAN Pillar 5 — liberty / privacy / presumption of innocence / individual rights. ROAN Pillar 7 — judicial review / procedural fairness. ROAN Pillar 8 — policing / correctional and government powers / accountability. The title makes this sound like routine legislative housekeeping, but some provisions are substantial. The extension of Bail Act s 22C continues an exceptional bail test for certain 14–17-year-olds charged with specified further offences while already on bail. The provision requires a high degree of confidence that the young person will not commit a serious indictable offence before bail can be granted. The provision remains temporary, but its sunset has again been extended. There are also significant provisions relating to forensic patients. Correctional and juvenile justice officers transporting certain patients may exercise ordinary correctional functions, which can include force, restraint equipment and personal searches. The Legislation Review Committee specifically questioned applying powers ordinarily used against prisoners and detainees to people detained for therapeutic purposes after findings involving mental illness or cognitive impairment. The legislation also retrospectively affects some applications involving non-release life sentences. For FERM, this is worth recording because significant changes affecting liberty, bail, privacy and correctional power were packaged inside a broad “miscellaneous” justice Bill rather than presented as a single-purpose reform. It is another reminder that the title of a Bill is not a reliable guide to the significance of the powers inside it. Passed — Parliament passed the Bill on 24 September 2026. Royal Assent 30 September 2026. Act No. 35 of 2026.

Building (Approvals and Practitioners) Bill 2026

NSW Government legislation establishing a new framework for building approvals, building practitioners, registered building work, compliance and enforcement. It creates a system for approval and oversight of building work, including prefabricated buildings, regulates who may carry out specified registered work, establishes disciplinary mechanisms and imposes a statutory duty of care concerning construction defects. It also gives authorised officers substantial investigation and enforcement powers. Those powers include requiring documents, compelling answers to questions, recording questioning, entering non-residential premises without a warrant in specified circumstances, inspecting and testing property, seizing items and, in some circumstances, destructively testing or destroying seized property. The legislation also creates information-sharing powers between the building regulator and other agencies. The NSW Legislation Review Committee identified concerns involving property rights, privacy, self-incrimination, procedural fairness, substantial matters being left to regulations, a Henry VIII provision and broad delegation of statutory functions.

Sections: ss 146–147 — compulsory production of documents and answers to questions. s 148 — self-incrimination provisions and protections. s 149 — recording of answers. ss 156–161 — inspection, destructive testing, seizure, destruction and disposal powers. s 188 — time limits for commencing proceedings. s 195 — information-sharing arrangements. s 46 — regulations may modify provisions governing Crown building work. s 196 — delegation and sub-delegation of Ministerial and Secretarial functions.

ROAN Pillar 2 — property / land / building rights. ROAN Pillar 5 — privacy / property / self-incrimination / individual rights. ROAN Pillar 7 — procedural safeguards and review. ROAN Pillar 8 — regulatory power / delegated legislation / government accountability. The objective of improving building standards and holding unsafe or incompetent practitioners accountable is legitimate, particularly given serious past failures in the building industry. However, the enforcement regime is substantial. Authorised officers may enter non-residential premises without a warrant for compliance purposes and can inspect, photograph, record, seize and destructively test property. In some circumstances seized property may later be destroyed without compensation. Sections 146–148 are also significant. A person may be compelled to produce documents or answer questions and cannot refuse merely because the information may incriminate them or expose them to a penalty. There is protection against compelled information being used directly against the individual in ordinary criminal or civil proceedings, but the legislation expressly allows compelled information to be used as a basis for disciplinary action. The information-sharing framework is also broad. Section 195 permits information to be shared with relevant agencies, while regulations can expand both the types of information shared and the agencies involved. Section 46 is particularly worth recording. It allows regulations to modify the statutory provisions dealing with Crown building work. The Legislation Review Committee described this as a Henry VIII provision because Executive regulations can modify how the primary Act itself operates. For FERM, this is a strong example of a legitimate regulatory objective being accompanied by substantial coercive, information-gathering and delegated powers. Passed — Parliament passed the Bill on 4 August 2026. Royal Assent 14 August 2026. Act No. 26 of 2026.

Superannuation Legislation Amendment (Tackling the Gender Super Gap) Bill 2025

Federal private senator’s bill sponsored by Senator Jane Hume. The Bill proposed allowing spouses to split their combined superannuation balances between them on an ongoing annual basis, rather than relying only on the existing limited contribution-splitting arrangements. It would have amended the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993, associated regulations and the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997. The proposal was intended to address differences in superannuation accumulation between partners, particularly where one partner takes significant time away from paid employment because of caring responsibilities. The Bill did not compel couples to equalise their balances. It proposed an additional mechanism allowing eligible spouses to choose to transfer superannuation interests between them.

Sections: Schedule 1 — amendments to the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 and associated regulations concerning spouse superannuation splitting. Schedule 2 — taxation amendments supporting transfers between spouses.

ROAN Pillar 5 — private retirement savings / family financial rights / individual choice. ROAN Pillar 8 — compulsory superannuation framework / government regulation. This is worth recording because superannuation is legally attached to individual workers even though financial and caring decisions are often made at household level. A partner who leaves or reduces paid work to care for children or other family members can accumulate substantially less retirement savings even where the household jointly decided who would undertake that unpaid work. The Bill attempted to give couples greater flexibility to address that imbalance themselves by allowing eligible spouses to redistribute superannuation between their accounts. There is another side to consider. More flexible super splitting could add complexity to the system and may have consequences for taxation, asset protection, relationship breakdown and eligibility for other financial arrangements. For FERM, the broader issue is how much control individuals and families should retain over compulsory retirement savings once those savings enter the statutory superannuation system, and whether the existing rules adequately recognise unpaid caring work and financial decisions made within families. Although the Bill was defeated, the underlying policy issue — unequal retirement savings between partners and how much freedom couples should have to redistribute compulsory superannuation — remains unresolved.

Surveillance Devices and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025

NSW Government bill introduced in October 2025 proposing significant changes to the Surveillance Devices Act 2007 and police body-worn-video laws. The Bill would have clarified when officers of government investigative bodies could overtly use listening and optical surveillance devices where another Act authorised that activity. It also proposed a public-interest pathway allowing unlawfully obtained surveillance recordings to be provided to investigative agencies in specified circumstances. At the same time, it proposed a new offence concerning possession of an unlawfully made private recording where a person failed to promptly provide it to an investigative body. For individuals, the maximum penalty could have reached five years imprisonment. It also proposed regulation-making powers allowing classes of overt surveillance-device use to be exempted from parts of the Surveillance Devices Act and changes allowing police body-worn video to record conversations with drivers and passengers.

Sections: Schedule 1 [5] — proposed s 8A, overt use of listening and optical surveillance devices authorised by other Acts. Schedule 1 [6] — regulation-making power concerning tracking devices. Schedule 1 [7] — possession of unlawfully obtained surveillance records. Schedule 1 [8] — proposed ss 14A–14B, communication and use of surveillance records. Schedule 2 — police body-worn-video amendments.

ROAN Pillar 5 — privacy / surveillance / individual rights. ROAN Pillar 8 — police and investigative powers / delegated legislation / government accountability. The Bill addressed a genuine problem: investigators may receive recordings containing evidence of serious crime, corruption or other wrongdoing even though the recording itself was originally made unlawfully. Creating a lawful public-interest pathway for that material to reach an investigative agency therefore had a legitimate purpose. However, the Bill went considerably further than simply protecting whistleblowers or allowing evidence of wrongdoing to be handed to authorities. It also proposed broader surveillance exceptions, regulation-making powers capable of exempting classes of surveillance activity from ordinary statutory restrictions, changes to police body-worn-video powers and a serious new offence concerning possession of unlawfully obtained recordings. The proposed offence was particularly significant because an individual could potentially face up to five years imprisonment for retaining an unlawfully made private recording rather than promptly providing it to an investigative body. For FERM, the important issue is the balance between allowing genuine evidence of crime or corruption to reach authorities and expanding the State’s surveillance, recording and information-control powers. The fact that the Bill was defeated is also worth recording because parts of the policy later returned through narrower legislation, including the Surveillance Devices Amendment (Public Interest Exceptions) Act 2026, which is already on the ROAN board. That demonstrates an important parliamentary point: defeat of a Bill does not necessarily mean the underlying policy or powers disappear. Defeated — the Bill progressed through earlier stages but its third reading was negatived in the NSW Legislative Council on 5 February 2026.

Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Criminal and Migration Laws) Bill 2026

Federal Government legislation creating and expanding criminal, hate-group and migration powers. The Act creates aggravated offences for certain religious officials or leaders advocating or threatening force or violence, increases penalties for specified hate-related offences and creates aggravated offences involving attempts to radicalise children. It establishes a statutory framework allowing organisations to be listed as prohibited hate groups, with criminal consequences associated with involvement in those organisations. It also changes the prohibited-symbol regime, including evidentiary and fault provisions, and creates additional powers concerning symbols. The Migration Act was also amended so that specified hate-motivated and extremist conduct can be relevant to visa refusal or cancellation decisions. The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights identified engagement with a wide range of rights including freedom of expression, association, movement, privacy, liberty, equality and fair-trial rights.

Sections: Schedule 1 Part 1 — aggravated offences for preachers and leaders. Schedule 1 Part 3 — aggravated sentencing factor. Schedule 1 Part 4 — prohibited hate groups. Schedule 1 Part 5 — aggravated grooming offences. Schedule 1 Part 6 — prohibited hate-symbol provisions. Schedule 1 Part 7 — statutory review. Schedule 2 — migration amendments concerning hate and extremist conduct.

ROAN Pillar 5 — freedom of expression / association / individual rights. ROAN Pillar 7 — criminal process / due process / evidentiary safeguards. ROAN Pillar 8 — executive and national-security power / accountability. The objective of preventing violence, antisemitism and organised hatred is legitimate. The FERM issue is the breadth of the machinery Parliament created to achieve that objective. The legislation allows organisations to be formally designated as prohibited hate groups, expands criminal liability relating to symbols and association, alters some fault and evidentiary settings and allows hate-related conduct to affect immigration status. For ROAN, this is exactly the kind of legislation where scrutiny of definitions, evidentiary thresholds, Ministerial or executive discretion and review rights matters. The central question is whether laws aimed at genuine incitement, violence and organised extremism remain clearly confined to that conduct without unnecessarily capturing lawful political, religious or controversial expression. Passed both Houses 20 January 2026. Royal Assent 21 January 2026. Act No. 2 of 2026 Kristy McBain link: Kristy voted YES to agree to the amended Bill during consideration in detail on 20 January 2026.

Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Firearms and Customs Laws) Bill 2026

Federal Government legislation introduced and passed on 20 January 2026 as part of a package responding to antisemitism, violent extremism and firearms-related risks. The legislation establishes a national firearms background-check framework, including involvement by AusCheck, ASIO and the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission. It also establishes a national firearms buyback scheme, strengthens import controls on firearms and firearm-related goods, introduces public-safety tests for some firearm imports and allows firearms information to be transmitted to the ACIC. Separate provisions prohibit the import and export of certain violent extremist material and goods depicting prohibited symbols. It also creates offences involving the use of carriage services to deal with material relating to firearms and explosives manufacture.

Sections: Schedule 1 — customs amendments concerning prohibited extremist material. Schedule 2 Part 1 — national firearms buyback. Schedule 2 Part 2 — firearms background checks. Schedule 2 Part 3 — transmission of firearms information to ACIC. Schedule 2 Parts 4–6 — public-safety tests and firearms import controls. Schedule 2 Part 7 — carriage-service offences concerning firearms and explosives manufacture material.

ROAN Pillar 5 — individual rights / privacy / property / firearms ownership. ROAN Pillar 7 — review rights / procedural safeguards. ROAN Pillar 8 — security powers / information sharing / government accountability. There is a legitimate public-safety objective in preventing firearms from reaching people who present genuine terrorism, violent-extremism or serious-crime risks. But the legislation also substantially expands the national information architecture surrounding firearms ownership. Background checking can involve intelligence and criminal-information agencies, while firearms information can be transmitted between agencies and used for regulatory and national-security purposes. For FERM, the key questions are what information is considered during background checks, how inaccurate intelligence can be challenged, what review rights remain available, how information is shared between agencies and whether measures introduced in response to exceptional events remain proportionate over time. Passed both Houses on 20 January 2026. Royal Assent 21 January 2026. Act No. 1 of 2026. Kristy McBain link: Kristy voted YES at both the second reading and third reading on 20 January 2026.

Cash Distribution Framework Bill 2026

Federal Government legislation establishing a national regulatory framework intended to protect continued access to physical cash and the infrastructure used to distribute it. The Act expressly states that one of its objects is to support the continued availability and long-term economic viability of cash as a means of payment in Australia. It gives the Reserve Bank of Australia power to designate significant cash-distribution providers and establishes an ACCC oversight regime covering service agreements, pricing, access arrangements and service standards. It also creates crisis-management powers intended to keep critical cash-distribution services operating if a major provider becomes financially unviable or otherwise unable to continue. The framework is particularly relevant to regional communities, older Australians, people with disability, small businesses and people affected by natural disasters or telecommunications failures, where access to cash may remain essential.

Sections: ss 3 and 7 — object of the Act and availability of cash. ss 14–16 — RBA designation of significant cash-distribution entities. Parts 3–5 — ACCC oversight, agreements, dispute resolution and service standards. Parts 6–7 — crisis preparedness and resolution. ss 167–179 — information-gathering and disclosure powers. ss 181–188 — monitoring, investigation and enforcement.

ROAN Pillar 5 — financial choice / access to cash / individual autonomy. ROAN Pillar 8 — regulatory power / government accountability. This is actually a positive and important ROAN entry because Parliament has now expressly recognised continued access to cash as something worth protecting through legislation. For FERM, the important issue is whether the framework genuinely succeeds in preserving practical access to physical cash as digital payments, banking consolidation and branch closures continue. There are also significant regulatory powers attached to the framework. The RBA and ACCC receive information-gathering, monitoring, investigation, enforcement and crisis-resolution powers over designated cash-distribution providers. The question is therefore not simply whether regulation is good or bad. It is whether those powers remain proportionate while achieving the stated objective of ensuring Australians — particularly regional Australians — retain meaningful access to cash. Kristy McBain link: Kristy voted YES on 20 August 2026 to agree to the Senate amendment to the Bill before final passage.

Environmental Planning and Assessment Amendment (Vegetation) Bill 2026

NSW Government bill introduced by Planning Minister Paul Scully on 21 October 2026. The Bill creates a new civil-penalty regime under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 for unauthorised vegetation clearing. A person who contravenes an environmental planning instrument requiring a permit or approval before vegetation is cleared could face civil proceedings in the Land and Environment Court. “Clearing” is defined broadly and includes cutting down, felling, uprooting, killing, poisoning, ringbarking, burning or otherwise destroying vegetation, as well as substantially lopping or removing it. The maximum civil penalty would be $500,000 for an individual and $2.5 million otherwise. The framework also creates accessorial liability for people who aid, permit, induce or are knowingly involved in unlawful clearing, and potential liability for directors and managers of corporations in specified circumstances. The Land and Environment Court could also order remedial action, including requiring new vegetation to be planted, maintained to maturity and backed by financial security. Councils would generally be able to commence proceedings for contraventions occurring within their areas, with the Planning Secretary able to commence other proceedings.

Sections: Schedule 1 [7] — proposed Division 9.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. Proposed ss 9.59–9.75. Particularly s 9.60 — unauthorised vegetation clearing and maximum civil penalties. ss 9.61–9.62 — accessorial and corporate liability. ss 9.63–9.70 — proceedings, penalties, orders, council enforcement and injunctions. Schedule 1 [2]–[6] — information, self-incrimination and penalty-notice amendments.

ROAN Pillar 2 — land / private property / land-use rights. ROAN Pillar 8 — council enforcement / regulatory power / government accountability. There is a legitimate environmental objective behind the Bill: deliberate unlawful destruction of significant vegetation can cause permanent environmental and community harm, and existing penalties may be insufficient to deter large commercial developments from treating fines as a cost of doing business. However, the enforcement framework is substantial. An individual may face a civil penalty of up to $500,000, while corporations may face up to $2.5 million. Liability can extend beyond the person physically clearing vegetation to accessories and, in specified circumstances, company directors or managers. The Court may also order replanting and require vegetation to be maintained until mature, with security required to guarantee compliance. Councils receive an important enforcement role because they may commence civil penalty proceedings for contraventions within their areas. For FERM, the important questions are whether the definition of clearing is sufficiently precise, whether penalties are proportionate to different types and scales of breaches, what protections exist for landholders who make genuine mistakes, how consistently councils exercise the new powers, and whether property rights and due process remain properly protected alongside legitimate environmental enforcement. Watching — in the NSW Legislative Assembly at second-reading stage.

Climate Change (Net Zero Future) Amendment (Removal of Interim Climate Targets) Bill 2026

NSW private member’s bill introduced by Roy Butler MP. The Bill would remove the interim greenhouse-gas-emissions targets currently contained in the Climate Change (Net Zero Future) Act 2023 and retain one statutory target: reducing NSW net greenhouse gas emissions to zero by 30 June 2050. It therefore does not repeal NSW’s net-zero commitment. Instead, it removes the legislated interim milestones and replaces them with the single 2050 target. The Bill also provides that regulations could bring the 2050 target date forward to an earlier date. The sponsor argues that interim deadlines are contributing to rushed renewable-energy development, land-access disputes and inadequate consultation with regional communities, and that retaining a long-term target would allow the energy transition to proceed with more realistic planning.

Sections: Schedule 1 [2] — Climate Change (Net Zero Future) Act 2023, s 9. Proposed s 9(1) — net zero by 30 June 2050. Proposed s 9(2) — regulations may prescribe an earlier target date. Schedule 1 [1], [3]–[6] — consequential amendments.

ROAN Pillar 2 — land / property / regional communities. ROAN Pillar 8 — delegated power / government planning / accountability. ROAN Pillar 9 — energy / infrastructure / public resources. This Bill is particularly relevant to ROAN because it sits directly inside the debate over the speed and structure of NSW’s energy transition and its impact on regional communities, landholders and infrastructure. There are legitimate arguments on both sides. Legislated interim targets can provide governments and industry with measurable milestones and accountability. Removing them could weaken the ability to measure whether NSW is actually progressing toward the 2050 objective. On the other hand, statutory deadlines can create pressure to accelerate infrastructure approvals, transmission projects and renewable-energy developments where landholders and communities may argue consultation and planning have not kept pace. There is also a delegated-power issue. Proposed s 9(2) permits regulations — rather than another Act of Parliament — to change the statutory net-zero date, although the regulation may only move the date earlier, not later. For FERM, the question is not simply “for or against net zero”. It is whether major long-term energy policy should be driven through rigid interim statutory deadlines, what consequences those deadlines have for land and regional communities, and how much power to alter legislated targets should be given to the Executive through regulation. Watching — in the NSW Legislative Assembly at second-reading stage.

Firearms Amendment (Administrative Reviews by NCAT) Bill 2026

NSW private member’s bill introduced by Roy Butler MP on 15 October 2026. The Bill would restore access to the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal — NCAT — for administrative review of specified decisions made by the Commissioner of Police concerning firearms licences, permits, registrations and firearms prohibition orders. Those review rights were substantially changed by the Terrorism and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2025, which moved relevant challenges away from NCAT and into the NSW Supreme Court. The Bill would restore a version of the previous NCAT framework. Reviewable decisions would include refusal to issue certain licences or permits, conditions placed on licences or permits, specified revocations, refusal or cancellation of firearm registration and some firearms prohibition orders. There remain exclusions, including particular decisions involving apprehended violence orders, serious domestic abuse prevention orders and other mandatory disqualification circumstances.

Sections: Schedule 1 [2] — replacement Part 8 of the Firearms Act 1996. Proposed ss 75–76 — definition and administrative review by NCAT. Particularly proposed s 76(1)–(7).

ROAN Pillar 7 — administrative review / access to justice / procedural fairness. Secondary Pillar 5 — individual and property rights. Secondary Pillar 8 — police and administrative accountability. This is worth watching because it is fundamentally an access-to-review issue rather than simply a firearms-policy issue. Requiring a person to challenge an administrative decision in the NSW Supreme Court can involve considerably greater complexity and expense than review through NCAT. Restoring Tribunal review may therefore make government decision-making more practically reviewable by ordinary citizens. There are also legitimate public-safety considerations surrounding firearm licensing, particularly where domestic violence, criminal intelligence or serious security risks are involved. The Bill retains safeguards around sensitive criminal intelligence. NCAT may receive some evidence and hear argument without the public, applicant or applicant’s representative present where necessary to prevent disclosure of protected criminal intelligence. For FERM, the key issue is whether important government licensing decisions should remain subject to accessible independent merits review and whether the safeguards around confidential police information preserve an appropriate balance between procedural fairness and public safety. Watching — in the NSW Legislative Assembly at second-reading stage.

Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Amendment (Drug Detection Dogs) Bill 2026

NSW private member’s bill introduced by Cate Faehrmann MLC on 14 October 2026. The Bill would repeal the provisions of the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 that specifically authorise NSW Police to use dogs for drug detection. The current drug-detection-dog powers sit in Part 11 Division 2 of the Act. The Bill removes that Division and makes consequential amendments to other legislation and regulations. The change is specifically directed at drug-detection dogs. It does not abolish police use of dogs for other purposes such as firearms or explosives detection.

Sections: Schedule 1 [5] — repeal of Part 11 Division 2 of the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002. Schedule 1 [1]–[4] — consequential amendments. Schedule 2 — consequential amendments to other legislation.

ROAN Pillar 5 — privacy / individual rights / freedom from intrusive searches. ROAN Pillar 8 — police powers / government accountability. This is worth watching because drug-detection dogs are used in public places including railway stations, licensed venues, festivals and entertainment precincts and can lead to further police interaction and searches. The Bill takes the substantial step of removing the statutory drug-detection-dog power altogether rather than simply changing the circumstances in which dogs may be deployed. There are competing considerations. Supporters argue that drug-dog operations can produce intrusive encounters and searches, have questionable effectiveness and disproportionately affect people attending particular venues or events. Police and others may argue that detection dogs remain a useful enforcement and deterrence tool. For FERM, the core question is proportionality: whether the privacy and personal-search consequences of routine drug-dog operations are justified by their effectiveness in detecting unlawful drugs, and whether less intrusive enforcement methods are available. Worth watching whether Parliament supports outright repeal, proposes a narrower model instead, and what effect any change would have on associated police search powers. Watching — in the NSW Legislative Council at second-reading stage.

Sex Discrimination and Fair Work Amendment (Equality in Treatment in Religious Schools) Bill 2026

Federal private member’s bill introduced by Allegra Spender MP on 12 October 2026. The Bill would substantially narrow the existing exemptions that allow religious educational institutions to discriminate in certain circumstances on grounds including sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital or relationship status and pregnancy. It would replace the existing broad exemption in s 38 of the Sex Discrimination Act with a narrower framework. Religious educational institutions would retain some ability to preference people of their faith when initially employing staff and when appointing certain positions involving substantial religious leadership or teaching, such as principals, chaplains or religious-education teachers. However, religious schools would no longer have the same broad ability to discriminate against students or staff on other protected attributes. The Bill would also introduce proposed s 7AAA, extending protection against discrimination based on a person’s association or relationship with another person who has a protected attribute. Related Fair Work Act provisions would also be changed so workplace instruments and employment protections align with the amended anti-discrimination framework.

Sections: Schedule 1 — proposed Sex Discrimination Act s 7AAA; amendments to s 37; replacement of s 38; associated amendments to the Fair Work Act 2009.

ROAN Pillar 5 — freedom of religion / equality before the law / individual rights / parental choice. ROAN Pillar 8 — government regulation / institutional accountability. This is a genuine rights-balancing issue rather than a straightforward case of government overreach. On one side is the right of students and employees not to face discrimination because of personal attributes such as sexuality, gender, marital status or pregnancy. On the other is freedom of religion and the ability of religious communities to operate schools with a distinctive religious character, including the ability of parents to choose education based on those beliefs. The Bill preserves some religious preference in employment but substantially narrows the existing exemptions. For FERM, the important question is where government should draw the boundary between protecting individuals from discrimination and allowing religious institutions genuine freedom to maintain their beliefs and ethos. Worth watching how broadly the replacement s 38 operates, which employment positions qualify for religious preference, whether schools retain meaningful institutional religious freedom, protections for students and employees, and whether the final framework achieves a proportionate balance between competing rights.

Antisemitism in Higher Education Bill 2026

Federal private member’s bill introduced by Julian Leeser MP on 12 October 2026. The Bill would place a statutory definition of antisemitism, based on the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance working definition, into Commonwealth higher-education legislation. Registered higher-education providers would be required to adopt and implement the definition and take steps to prevent, combat and respond to antisemitism. The requirements include university policies, disciplinary and complaints processes, campus safety, discrimination and vilification, academic collaborations and teaching material. The Bill would also change Australian Research Council funding rules so that research applications and projects promoting, enabling or amplifying antisemitism would not qualify for financial assistance. Existing funding approvals would have to be brought into compliance within the transitional period. The statutory definition expressly provides that criticism of Israel comparable to criticism directed at another country is not, by itself, antisemitic.

Sections: Schedule 1 — Australian Research Council Act 2001 proposed s 4A and amendments to s 58; Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act 2011 proposed ss 5A and 31A, and amendment to s 58.

ROAN Pillar 5 — freedom of expression / academic freedom / protection from discrimination / individual rights. ROAN Pillar 8 — government regulation / public funding / institutional accountability. Protecting Jewish students, academics and staff from genuine antisemitic harassment, threats and discrimination is a legitimate objective. The FERM issue is the breadth of the regulatory mechanism used to achieve it. Proposed s 31A would require registered higher-education providers to adopt the statutory definition and take steps concerning teaching material, academic activity, collaborations, campus access and disciplinary procedures. The Bill also links compliance to Commonwealth research funding. That creates an important freedom-of-expression and academic-freedom question: how consistently will the statutory definition be interpreted when universities distinguish genuine antisemitism from lawful political, historical or academic debate? For FERM, the issue is not whether antisemitism should be tolerated — it should not. The issue is whether a nationally prescribed definition tied to university registration, teaching content and research funding remains sufficiently precise to protect Jewish Australians without unnecessarily restricting lawful academic or political expression. Worth watching the interpretation of proposed s 31A, TEQSA enforcement, funding consequences and whether adequate safeguards remain for legitimate criticism, research and debate.

Wearable Recording Devices (Import Control) Bill 2026

Federal private senator’s bill introduced by Senator David Shoebridge on 14 October 2026 responding to the rapid growth of covert wearable recording technology. The Bill would prohibit the importation of specified wearable recording devices unless permission is granted by the Minister or an authorised Commonwealth officer. A wearable recording device is defined broadly as a device capable of visual recording, designed to be worn or carried on the body or clothing, and not easily identifiable by an ordinary person as a recording device. Examples include covert recording technology incorporated into glasses, earbuds, watches, jewellery, buttons, clips and headwear. When deciding whether to permit importation, the Minister or authorised officer must consider whether the device is intended to be used as a disability aid and may impose conditions on an import permission. Importantly, the proposed restriction is temporary. Proposed regulation 5N would automatically repeal after 12 months.

Sections: Schedule 1 Part 1 — proposed regulation 5N of the Customs (Prohibited Imports) Regulations 1956, particularly proposed reg 5N(1)–(6).

ROAN Pillar 5 — privacy / personal autonomy / surveillance. ROAN Pillar 8 — executive regulatory power / accountability. The privacy problem the Bill addresses is genuine. Covert wearable cameras can allow people to be filmed without their knowledge in homes, workplaces, public spaces and other situations where an ordinary person may have no reasonable way of recognising that recording is occurring. But the regulatory mechanism also deserves scrutiny. The definition is deliberately broad and potentially captures a growing range of ordinary consumer technology. Permission to import a device would depend on Ministerial or authorised-officer discretion, with conditions capable of being attached to individual permissions. The 12-month sunset is therefore important. For FERM, this is worth watching both as a privacy protection and as an example of government responding to new technology through import prohibition. Key questions are how broadly “wearable recording device” is interpreted, how disability and legitimate-use exemptions operate, who receives permission, whether the temporary prohibition becomes permanent and what longer-term privacy framework ultimately replaces it.

Census and Statistics Amendment (Parliamentary Oversight of the Census) Bill 2026

Federal private senator’s bill introduced by Senator Dean Smith on 12 October 2026. The Bill would establish a permanent Parliamentary Joint Committee on the Census to oversee preparation, conduct and outcomes of future Australian Censuses. The Committee would monitor matters including Census topic selection, question design and testing, the reasons information is being collected, operational preparedness and other issues arising during preparations. After each Census, the Australian Statistician would also be required to prepare a comprehensive review covering matters including operational performance, systems and cyber resilience, data security, privacy and accessibility. The Committee would then conduct a formal inquiry into the conduct and outcomes of each Census and report to Parliament. The Committee is intended to have an advisory and scrutiny role rather than power to approve or determine Census arrangements.

Sections: Schedule 1 — proposed Part IIA, particularly ss 8B–8C and the provisions governing pre-Census oversight, the Australian Statistician's post-Census review and the mandatory parliamentary inquiry.

ROAN Pillar 5 — privacy / personal information / data collection. ROAN Pillar 8 — parliamentary oversight / government accountability. There is a strong accountability argument for this Bill. The Census is one of the largest compulsory government information-gathering exercises in Australia, yet there is currently no permanent parliamentary committee dedicated to examining its preparation and operation. The privacy and cybersecurity review requirements are therefore positive. The counter-question is whether parliamentary oversight of matters such as topic selection and question design could eventually introduce political influence into what should remain an independent statistical process. For FERM, the important balance is independent parliamentary scrutiny of compulsory government data collection without allowing politicians themselves to determine what Australians must be asked or how statistical information is produced. Particularly worth watching are privacy and cybersecurity safeguards, what new categories of personal information future Censuses collect, whether the Committee remains genuinely advisory, and how effectively Parliament can scrutinise changes before Census data is collected.

Corporations Amendment (Digital Assets Framework) Bill 2025

Federal legislation establishing a new financial-services regulatory framework for digital-asset platforms and tokenised-custody platforms. It brings these platforms within the Australian Financial Services Licence framework, creates asset-holding, transaction, settlement and disclosure requirements, and gives ASIC and the Minister powers to regulate how digital-asset platforms operate. The framework applies to businesses holding or managing digital tokens for customers rather than banning or controlling digital assets themselves. It forms part of Australia's wider move toward regulated digital finance. Separate payments reforms are being developed for payment stablecoins and stored-value facilities, while AML/KYC and Digital ID frameworks are developing alongside them.

Sections: Schedule 1 — proposed ss 761GB, 761GC–761GF, 912BE–912BG; Ministerial powers in Schedule 1 items 14, 19 and 37

ROAN Pillar 5 — privacy / financial rights / individual choice. ROAN Pillar 8 — regulatory power / delegated legislation / government accountability. Worth watching because the Act brings digital-asset platforms further into the regulated financial system while giving ASIC and the Minister significant powers to determine parts of the regime through legislative instruments and standards. Proposed provisions allow ASIC to set asset-holding, transaction and settlement standards, while Ministerial powers can affect how particular digital-asset platforms or financial products are treated. Parliamentary scrutiny also raised concerns about provisions allowing delegated legislation to modify or exempt aspects of the primary legislation. There is a wider financial-autonomy issue to monitor. Australia is separately developing regulation for payment stablecoins, while AML/KYC rules increasingly rely on digital identity verification and the Australian Digital ID system expands to private-sector participation. Internationally, major US-dollar stablecoins hold substantial reserves in short-term US Treasury securities, meaning growth in stablecoin use can also increase demand for US Government debt. These systems are not currently one legally integrated system, and Australian law does not currently require a person to have Digital ID simply to use a stablecoin. For FERM, the issue is what happens as regulated digital assets, payment stablecoins, mandatory KYC, interoperable Digital ID and increasingly traceable digital payments develop alongside one another — particularly whether non-digital alternatives remain genuinely available and whether Digital ID remains voluntary in practice. The Bill passed both Houses on 1 April 2026 and received assent on 8 April 2026, becoming Act No. 38 of 2026.

Health Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2026

NSW Government bill making amendments across the health system, including authority for the NSW Health Secretary to approve body-worn cameras for relevant health workers where considered necessary to mitigate or respond to risks of harm.

Sections: Schedule 3 — proposed s 126A of the Health Services Act 1997; other schedules deal with health administration, practitioners, pathology and related matters.

Pillar 5 — patient privacy / personal information. Pillar 8 — surveillance / administrative power / government accountability. Protecting paramedics and other frontline health workers from occupational violence is a legitimate objective. The privacy issue arises because body-worn cameras may record patients, relatives and others during medical emergencies and health interactions, including circumstances where people are distressed, injured, cognitively impaired or otherwise vulnerable. The Bill originally included provisions relating to in-vehicle cameras in patient transport vehicles. Those provisions were removed by amendments in the Legislative Assembly, while the body-worn-camera provisions remain. For FERM, the relevant questions are when recording may occur, what notice is required where practicable, how recordings are stored, who can access or disclose them, retention periods and whether footage can later be used for purposes beyond the worker-safety purpose for which the power was created. Watching — passed the NSW Legislative Assembly with amendments on 22 September 2026. It is currently in the Legislative Council and has not yet passed Parliament.

Australian Centre for Disease Control Act 2025

Federal legislation establishing the Australian Centre for Disease Control and giving its Director-General substantial public-health information-gathering and emergency data-sharing powers.

Sections: ss 43–49 — information requests, compulsory information directions, review, civil penalties and register of directions. ss 67–70 — emergency data-sharing declarations and collection, use and disclosure of information.

Pillar 4 — emergency / public-health powers. Pillar 5 — privacy / personal and health information. Pillar 7 — administrative review. Pillar 8 — compulsory information gathering / executive power / parliamentary oversight. Worth recording because the Act establishes both voluntary and compulsory information-gathering mechanisms. Under s 45, the Director-General can issue a statutory direction requiring specified persons or organisations to provide information where the statutory requirements are met. Failure to comply can attract a civil penalty. The emergency data-sharing provisions are particularly important. Under s 67, where the Director-General is satisfied there is a severe and immediate, or severe and unforeseen, threat to public health and a declaration is necessary to respond to it, a data-sharing declaration may be made. A declaration can identify classes of information, including personal information, entities permitted to collect, use or disclose it, recipients and permitted purposes. A declaration is a legislative instrument, but ordinary parliamentary disallowance under s 42 of the Legislation Act 2003 does not apply. This Act should not be described as creating compulsory vaccination powers. It does not. The FERM issue is compulsory information gathering, emergency sharing of personal information and the accountability arrangements governing those powers. Passed — Royal Assent 10 November 2025. Act No. 61 of 2025. In force from 1 January 2026.

My Health Record (Share by Default) Rules 2025

Federal legislative rules creating the “Share by Default” framework for specified medical information in My Health Record. The current rules operate from 1 July 2026 and apply initially to specified pathology and diagnostic-imaging information.

Sections: My Health Record (Share by Default) Rules 2025 — ss 5–14, particularly the diagnostic-imaging and pathology provisions.

Pillar 5 — medical privacy / personal information / patient choice. Pillar 8 — delegated legislation / digital government systems / accountability. Under the framework, specified pathology and diagnostic-imaging reports must generally be shared with the My Health Record system within the periods prescribed by the Rules. The framework therefore moves toward health information being shared by default rather than depending upon a separate affirmative decision to upload each report. There remain exclusions and patient-choice mechanisms, so this should not be described as an absolute rule that every piece of medical information must be uploaded regardless of circumstances. For FERM, the issue is the wider policy direction: increasing categories of personal medical information entering interconnected digital-health systems by default, how visible and effective patient choice remains, what further categories may later be added and how much of the system is developed through delegated rules rather than fresh Acts of Parliament.

Health Records and Information Privacy Amendment (Single Digital Patient Record) Regulation (No 2) 2025

NSW regulation altering the privacy framework applying to the State’s Single Digital Patient Record, or SDPR. The regulation expressly provides that the Single Digital Patient Record is not a “health records linkage system” for Health Privacy Principle 15.

Sections: Health Records and Information Privacy Regulation 2022 — s 9; Health Records and Information Privacy Act 2002 — Schedule 1, HPP 15.

Pillar 5 — medical privacy / consent / control of personal health information. Pillar 8 — delegated legislation / executive rule-making / parliamentary oversight. This is particularly worth recording because the NSW Parliament’s Delegated Legislation Committee scrutinised the mechanism used. Health Privacy Principle 15 ordinarily provides an express-consent protection concerning inclusion of health information in a health-records linkage system. The Health Minister advised the Committee that without the exemption, HPP 15 would prevent patient records being included in the SDPR without express patient consent. The Minister confirmed that express consent is not being obtained from each patient before records are transferred into the SDPR. The reasons advanced included the scale of the system, involving records concerning more than eight million people, existing obligations to retain medical records, cases where patients cannot provide consent and the clinical risks created by fragmented records. There is an important distinction. NSW Health advised that while records can be included in the SDPR without express consent, sharing through the additional “Care Everywhere” functionality with external organisations is intended to occur with patient consent. The Delegated Legislation Committee nevertheless remained concerned about future extension of the system and said the legal framework surrounding something as significant as the SDPR would be more appropriately contained in primary legislation. For FERM, this is a strong example of a substantial change concerning sensitive personal information being implemented through delegated regulation rather than a new Act debated comprehensively by Parliament. Status: In force — commenced 21 November 2025. Made as delegated legislation under the Health Records and Information Privacy Act 2002, rather than passed as a separate Bill.

National Health Amendment (Passive Immunological Products) Act 2026

Federal Government legislation expanding the definition of “vaccine” in the National Health Act 1953 so preparations providing either active or passive immunity can operate within the National Immunisation Program framework.

Sections: Schedule 1 item 1 — National Health Act 1953, s 4(1), amended definition of “vaccine”.

Pillar 5 — medical privacy / personal health information / informed consent. Pillar 8 — delegated health policy / government accountability. Worth recording because this is broader than a terminology change. It allows newer immunological products, including passive-immunity products, to fall within the statutory National Immunisation Program framework. The Act does not itself mandate administration of those products. The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights nevertheless identified a privacy consequence. Vaccination providers are required to report specified information to the Australian Immunisation Register. Expanding the kinds of products capable of falling within the National Immunisation Program can therefore expand the scope of medical information reported to the Register. That information can include identifying information about the recipient and provider, product brand, dose, batch and date of administration. For FERM, the key questions are what products are subsequently designated, what information must be reported, who may access or receive it and whether privacy protections keep pace with the expanding immunisation framework. Passed both Houses 1 April 2026. Royal Assent 8 April 2026. Act No. 34 of 2026.

A New Tax System (Family Assistance) Amendment (No Jab No Pay Repeal) Bill 2025

Federal private senator’s bill sponsored by Senator Alex Antic seeking to restore a conscientious-objection pathway within the family-assistance immunisation requirements. It would have allowed a child to satisfy the immunisation requirement for Child Care Subsidy where a recognised immunisation provider had discussed the benefits and risks of vaccination with the parent and the parent then declared a conscientious objection. It also proposed that children aged 7 or older automatically satisfy the immunisation requirement.

Sections: Schedule 1 — proposed definition of “conscientious objection”; amendments to s 6 concerning immunisation requirements, professional advice and conscientious objection.

Pillar 5 — bodily autonomy / informed consent / parental choice / freedom of conscience / financial rights. Pillar 8 — government policy / use of financial incentives and conditions. Worth recording because the existing “No Jab No Pay” framework does not physically compel vaccination, but it attaches eligibility for government family assistance to compliance with immunisation requirements. The policy question is therefore not simply whether vaccination is beneficial. It is whether access to financial assistance should be used as a mechanism to influence a lawful medical decision. The proposed conscientious-objection pathway still required engagement with a recognised immunisation provider, who would have to confirm that the benefits and risks of immunisation had been discussed. For ROAN/FERM, this goes directly to the distinction between informed consent and indirect government pressure. A person may technically remain free to refuse a medical intervention while facing a financial consequence for doing so. Defeated — second reading negatived in the Senate on 16 September 2026, 6 votes to 34.

AI Kill Switch and Data Centre Control Bill 2026

its the only one that in some way curbs foreign Data Centre companies turning Australia into one big Data Centre. The bill: establishes safeguards for advanced artificial intelligence (AI) systems, including mandatory shutdown capabilities, critical incident reporting obligations and emergency intervention powers; and imposes a moratorium on the construction and upgrade of AI data centres unless specified conditions are met.

the specified conditions to be met could be too loose or cheatable...? think its more a case of watching where it goes next.

Online Safety Amendment (Strengthening Enforcement for the Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2026

Federal Government legislation substantially strengthening the eSafety Commissioner’s enforcement powers under Australia’s social-media minimum-age regime. It expands compulsory information-gathering beyond social-media platforms themselves, substantially increases civil penalties and creates a new compulsory examination regime allowing individuals to be summoned, questioned under oath and required to produce documents.

Sections: Schedule 1 — ss 63G–63H — expanded compulsory information and document production and increased penalties. Schedule 2 — new Division 4A, ss 63HA–63HG — compulsory examinations, questioning under oath or affirmation, document production, penalties for non-compliance and self-incrimination provisions.

Pillar 5 — privacy / individual rights / self-incrimination. Pillar 7 — procedural safeguards. Pillar 8 — regulatory power / compulsory information gathering / government accountability. Worth recording because this Act goes considerably further than requiring social-media platforms to prevent under-16s from holding accounts. Under s 63G, the eSafety Commissioner may compel information and documents not only from social-media platforms but from any person reasonably believed to hold information relevant to compliance, including third parties such as age-assurance providers and app-store operators. New ss 63HA–63HG create a compulsory examination regime. A person may be summoned to appear before the Commissioner or a delegate, required to produce documents and answer relevant questions, and examined under oath or affirmation. Examinations are private and the person may have an adviser present. Failure to comply with an examination notice, answer a required question or take an oath or affirmation can constitute a criminal offence carrying up to 12 months imprisonment, as well as substantial civil penalties. The self-incrimination provision is particularly significant. Under s 63HG, a person cannot refuse to provide information, evidence, documents or answers merely because doing so may incriminate them or expose them to a penalty. Use and derivative-use protections generally prevent that compelled material from later being used against the person in ordinary criminal or civil-penalty proceedings, subject to specified exceptions. Key FERM point: a person cannot refuse to answer or produce documents merely because doing so may incriminate them, while refusal to comply with the examination regime can carry up to 12 months imprisonment. The Government stated that the examination powers are intended to investigate platform compliance rather than target parents or children. However, the enacted provision itself applies broadly to “a person” reasonably believed capable of providing relevant information or evidence; there is no categorical parent-or-child exemption written into the provision. The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights also examined the legislation's implications for privacy and children's rights. For ROAN/FERM, the legitimate objective is enforcing the social-media minimum-age regime and ensuring large technology companies cannot control or conceal the evidence needed to assess compliance. The accountability issue is the breadth of the enforcement machinery created to achieve that objective: compulsory third-party information gathering, private examinations under oath, compulsory answers and documents, imprisonment for non-compliance and displacement of the ordinary privilege against self-incrimination. That makes this considerably more than a simple social-media age-restriction amendment. Passed Parliament — 10 September 2026. Royal Assent 11 September 2026. Act No. 83 of 2026.

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026

Federal Government legislation making substantial changes to NDIS access, planning, funding, compliance, provider regulation and administration. It allows Ministerial reductions to specified categories of support funding, strengthens NDIA fraud and information-gathering powers, imposes new record-retention and claiming requirements and creates a statutory framework for automated administrative decision-making.

Sections: Schedule 1 — access and planning reforms, particularly s 34A — Ministerial determination reducing funding for specified groups of supports. Schedule 2 — fraud, compliance, information-gathering, record retention and penalties. Schedule 3 Part 2 — ss 59B–59F — automated administrative action, designated provisions, standard operating procedures, oversight and review.

Pillar 5 — disability rights / access to services / due process. Pillar 7 — review rights and administrative fairness. Pillar 8 — automated government decision-making / delegated power / accountability. Worth recording because this is much more than a funding-sustainability measure. Under s 34A, the Minister may make a legislative instrument reducing funding for specified groups of supports in classes of participant plans. In the final Act this power is confined to specified support categories, including assistance with social, economic and community participation and improved daily living skills. The legislation expressly contemplates that the resulting funding may be less than the actual cost of reasonable and necessary supports. The Act also strengthens NDIA compliance and enforcement powers. Participants, nominees, providers, financial institutions and others may be required to provide information or retain records. Failure to comply with some information requirements can attract civil penalties. Participants and providers also face new record-retention obligations. If an NDIS payment has been received but a required record has not been retained and entitlement cannot otherwise be demonstrated, the amount can become a debt owed to the NDIA. The ordinary claim period for NDIS supports is also reduced from 2 years to 90 days, subject to limited exceptions. Automated government decision-making This is one of the most significant provisions in the Act. Under s 59B, the NDIA CEO may arrange for computer programs to take administrative action that would otherwise be taken by the CEO. “Administrative action” is defined broadly enough to include making decisions, exercising powers, performing functions and associated administrative acts. Most importantly, s 59B(4) expressly allows automated administrative action to involve “a discretion”, “an evaluative judgement” or the “formation of a state of mind”. That means the legislation goes beyond simply allowing computers to perform routine calculations or process straightforward claims. Parliament has expressly created a statutory basis for some automated systems to undertake forms of government decision-making that can involve judgement or discretion. The final Act does include safeguards. Where an automated action involves an evaluative determination, s 59D requires the CEO to make a standard operating procedure instrument setting out objective circumstances and how the determination must be made. Proposed instruments must also be published before they are made. The Minister may designate additional legislative provisions for automation. Where those provisions involve evaluative determinations, the Minister must first be satisfied that automation is appropriate. The CEO also retains power to substitute a human decision where an automated decision is not considered correct or preferable. Ordinary review rights remain available, and a person receiving notice of an automated decision must be told that the decision was made by computer program. For FERM, the important point is therefore not simply that “the NDIS is using computers”. Government agencies have used automated systems for administrative processing for years. The significant change is that Parliament has expressly authorised automation to perform some discretionary and evaluative administrative decision-making. The accountability question is what happens next: which decisions are progressively designated for automation, how much judgement those decisions involve, how transparent the operating rules remain, what data the system relies upon and whether genuinely effective human review remains available when an automated decision affects a person’s disability supports. The Act therefore brings several major government powers together in the same reform package: Ministerial funding-reduction powers, expanded information gathering and compliance, new debts and penalties, shorter claim periods and statutory authority for automated decision-making involving discretion and evaluative judgement. For ROAN/FERM, that combination makes this legislation worth monitoring well beyond the immediate NDIS reforms. It provides a current example of Parliament creating a legal framework for government decision-making that may increasingly be performed by computer systems rather than individual public officials. Passed — both Houses on 19 August 2026. Royal Assent 20 August 2026. Act No. 66 of 2026.

Energy and Utilities Administration Amendment Bill 2026

NSW Government legislation substantially expanding the emergency powers available under the Energy and Utilities Administration Act 1987. It creates updated energy-supply emergency directions, new cyber-security directions, strengthened compulsory information and interview powers, expanded enforcement arrangements and changes to corporate liability and delegation.

Sections: ss 25–26 — energy-supply and cyber-security directions. ss 27–27B — information notices and compelled interviews. ss 31–33I — inspectors, questioning, information disclosure, self-incrimination and enforcement. s 45 — delegation. s 47A — corporate/director liability.

Pillar 4 — emergency powers. Pillar 5 — due process / property / self-incrimination. Pillar 8 — Ministerial power / delegated authority / government accountability. Worth recording because some very broad powers sit inside what sounds like routine energy-administration legislation. During a declared energy-supply emergency, s 25 allows the Minister to control, direct, restrict or prohibit the supply or use of a declared form of energy. A direction may operate throughout NSW or only in specified areas and may apply differently to different circumstances. More unusually, an energy-supply direction can authorise a person to enter land or places connected with energy supply and take possession, control or use of property, a business or an undertaking for purposes connected with supply. Directions to specified persons can also be made orally and take effect immediately, although they must subsequently be confirmed in writing. The legislation expressly provides that the Minister is not required to consult a person or otherwise comply with a requirement of procedural fairness before giving, varying or revoking an energy-supply direction. The same exclusion applies to the new cyber-security direction power under s 26. During a relevant declared cyber-security incident, the Minister may require a person to take action considered reasonably necessary to respond to or prevent impacts on information-technology systems. The NSW Legislation Review Committee specifically raised concern that excluding procedural fairness may remove protections such as notification, consultation or an opportunity to be heard, and noted that the exclusion applies not only when an emergency direction is first issued but also when it is varied or revoked. The information-gathering provisions are also significant. Under s 27B, the Minister may issue a compelled interview notice requiring a person to answer questions asked by an inspector, either in person or remotely. Contravention can attract a maximum penalty of 1,000 penalty units for an individual, plus further daily penalties while non-compliance continues. Under s 33C, a person cannot refuse to provide information or answer a question merely because doing so may incriminate them or expose them to a penalty. There is a form of use immunity for certain compelled answers or information where the person objects or was not warned of the right to object. However, that protection does not apply to a document required to be produced under a notice or direction. The Legislation Review Committee therefore specifically referred the impact on the privilege against self-incrimination to Parliament. The legislation also changes director liability under s 47A. Where a corporation contravenes relevant provisions, a director or person involved in management may be taken to have committed the same contravention unless they satisfy the court that they could not influence the corporation's conduct or exercised all due diligence to prevent it. The Committee identified this as a reversal of the ordinary onus of proof. There are also substantial delegation and regulation-making provisions. Under s 45, the Minister may delegate many statutory functions to the Secretary, Energy Corporation, public servants, committees and persons later prescribed by regulation. Energy-supply and cyber-security directions themselves are restricted and may only be delegated by the Minister to the Secretary. The NSW Legislation Review Committee referred five major issues to Parliament for consideration: removal of procedural-fairness requirements reversal of the onus of proof for directors powers affecting the privilege against self-incrimination broadly defined Ministerial powers substantive matters being left to later regulations. For ROAN/FERM, the legitimate purpose is clear: governments need to respond rapidly to serious energy shortages and cyber attacks on critical infrastructure. The accountability issue is the breadth of the machinery created for doing that — particularly Ministerial directions capable of controlling energy use and property during emergencies, express removal of procedural-fairness requirements, compelled interviews, limits on self-incrimination protections, reversed evidentiary burdens and substantial detail being left to Executive regulation. Passed — both Houses on 23 June 2026. Royal Assent 29 June 2026. Act No. 19 of 2026.

Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Further Organised Crimes Reforms) Bill 2026

NSW Government legislation substantially expanding police and Crime Commission powers aimed at organised crime. The reforms include new organised-crime digital evidence access orders, stronger Crime Commission coercive powers, interim Serious Crime Prevention Orders, new offences involving digital platforms, expanded use of toll-camera images and participation in national identity-matching services using facial images.

Sections: Crime Commission Act 2012 — new organised-crime summons and compulsory-production provisions, including proposed ss 29A and 39AA. Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 — organised-crime digital evidence access orders, particularly proposed ss 76AR–76AZG. Road Transport Act 2013 — identity-matching and facial-image provisions. Roads Act 1993 — collection, use and disclosure of toll-camera images.

Pillar 5 — privacy / individual rights / self-incrimination. Pillar 7 — due process / procedural safeguards. Pillar 8 — police, surveillance and coercive government power. This is a major one. The legislation creates a specialised digital evidence access order regime for organised-crime investigations. These orders can require a person to provide information or assistance necessary to allow police to access data held on a computer or other digital system. Under s 76AZG, failure to comply can carry a maximum penalty of 7 years imprisonment. The NSW Legislation Review Committee specifically raised concern that the offence operates as a strict-liability offence capable of attracting a substantial custodial sentence without the prosecution establishing the ordinary mental element of fault. The provision also says that it is not a reasonable excuse to refuse compliance merely because complying may incriminate the person or expose them to a penalty. Parliamentary scrutiny therefore specifically identified an impact on the privilege against self-incrimination. The powers can involve assistance such as passwords, access credentials and other information necessary to obtain digital evidence. The legislation also allows digital evidence access orders to reach data accessible through a device rather than simply information physically stored on it, making cloud accounts, messaging services, email and other remotely accessible data relevant to the regime. The Crime Commission receives additional coercive powers. In organised-crime investigations, a person served with an authorised summons can in certain circumstances be required to immediately provide a device, document or other thing rather than waiting until the formal Commission hearing. Refusal can attract criminal consequences. The reforms also expand Serious Crime Prevention Orders, including an interim-order mechanism capable of restricting a person’s associations, movements and access to devices, the internet and technological platforms while an application for a final order proceeds. Another significant part is information sharing. The Road Transport amendments enable NSW participation in the national Identity Matching Services framework, involving facial images and identity information, while the Roads Act amendments expand government access to toll-camera images for law-enforcement purposes. The NSW Legislation Review Committee specifically identified the breadth of these information powers and their effect on privacy as matters requiring Parliament’s attention. The original Bill also gave regulations power to expand important elements of the organised-crime framework, including what could qualify as a serious offence. Parliamentary scrutiny identified this as a concern because substantive matters affecting individual rights could be changed through delegated legislation rather than another Act of Parliament. There were some important safeguards added before passage. Parliament amended the Bill to require information supporting telephone applications for digital evidence access orders to subsequently be sworn or affirmed. It also strengthened Law Enforcement Conduct Commission oversight, including reporting to the relevant parliamentary committee and a later LECC review of the new powers. For ROAN/FERM, this is significant because it brings together several trends we are already tracking in other legislation: compelled digital access, reduced self-incrimination protections, substantial imprisonment for non-compliance, facial-image and government-data sharing, expanded surveillance information and preventative restrictions imposed before an ordinary criminal conviction. The legitimate objective is disrupting serious organised crime. The accountability question is whether powers created for that exceptional purpose remain tightly confined to it, particularly as definitions, technology and information-sharing systems expand over time. Passed — Parliament passed the Bill on 25 September 2026. Royal Assent 1 October 2026. Act No. 37 of 2026.

Workplace Protection Orders Bill 2026

NSW Government bill establishing a new workplace protection order scheme for workers in retail workplaces and other workplaces that may later be prescribed by regulation. The scheme allows eligible organisations and workplace representatives to seek court orders restricting a person's behaviour where there is a continuing risk of violence, stalking or intimidation towards workers. A workplace protection order may generally be sought against a person aged 14 years or older, although additional requirements apply before a final order can be made against a child.

Sections: ss 6–9 — workers, respondents and persons able to apply. ss 35–40 — interim workplace protection orders. ss 41–43 — final orders and matters the court must consider. ss 47–48 — mandatory and discretionary restrictions. s 56 — criminal offence for knowingly breaching an order. ss 57–59 — reviews, appeals and stays. ss 60–61 — service, police records and information.

Pillar 5 — individual rights / freedom of movement / due process. Pillar 7 — court orders / appeal rights. Pillar 8 — regulatory power / delegated expansion of scheme. The protective purpose is straightforward: workers should not have to tolerate violence, threats, stalking or intimidation simply because they work in a shop or another public-facing workplace. But the machinery is worth recording. Under s 48, a court may prohibit or restrict a respondent from approaching or contacting workers, entering or approaching workplaces and connected places, possessing specified firearms or prohibited weapons, or engaging in specified behaviour affecting protected workers. The Bill does include safeguards. Restrictions must be considered necessary for worker safety and must not cause undue hardship to the respondent. When deciding whether to make an order, the court must also consider whether less restrictive interventions would be sufficient. A final order against a child requires the court to find exceptional circumstances. However, the scheme can still apply from age 14. Under s 56, knowingly breaching a workplace protection order is a criminal offence carrying a maximum penalty of 2 years imprisonment or 50 penalty units, or both. An attempt to breach the order is punishable as though the offence had actually been committed. There is another important procedural point. Under s 59, lodging an appeal does not automatically suspend the workplace protection order. The respondent must separately apply for a stay, and the court may grant one only if satisfied it is safe to do so. The Bill also allows the scheme to extend beyond retail workplaces to other classes of workplace later prescribed by regulation. That means the eventual reach of the framework is not necessarily limited to the workplaces expressly identified when Parliament passes the Bill. For ROAN/FERM, the issue is the balance between genuine protection of workers and the creation of a civil-order system capable of substantially restricting a person's movements and conduct, with criminal imprisonment available for breach. Particular points to watch are expansion of the scheme through regulation, application to children from age 14, proportionality of restrictions and the fact that an appeal does not itself stop an order operating. Watching — introduced in the Legislative Assembly on 20 October 2026. Currently at second-reading stage.

Mining Amendment (Small-scale Licences) Bill 2026

NSW Government bill restructuring and modernising the regulation of small-scale mining and opal licences in New South Wales. It introduces digital licensing and administration, changes land-access and compensation arrangements, creates new unlawful-entry and exclusion-order offences, expands collection and disclosure of personal information and permits regulations to modify aspects of the appeal process.

Sections: Proposed ss 234–238A — unlawful entry onto mineral-claim areas, exclusion orders and appeals. Proposed s 254(12) — disclosure of permit applicants’ personal information to landholders. Proposed s 238P — public register of small-scale licence applications and licences. Proposed s 268C — collection, use and disclosure of personal information. Clause 2 — commencement by proclamation.

Pillar 2 — land / mining / property and access rights. Pillar 5 — privacy / presumption of innocence / individual rights. Pillar 7 — appeal and procedural safeguards. Pillar 8 — delegated power / regulatory accountability. Worth watching because several significant rights and accountability provisions sit inside what otherwise looks like an administrative overhaul of opal-mining licences. Proposed s 234 creates two strict-liability unlawful-entry offences. A person found on another person’s mineral-claim area without reasonable excuse may face up to 6 months imprisonment. If the person also possesses tools or equipment commonly used for prospecting or mining, the maximum penalty increases to 2 years imprisonment. The NSW Legislation Review Committee specifically raised concern that these offences can result in imprisonment without the prosecution having to establish the ordinary mental element of fault. Proposed ss 235–238 establish exclusion orders preventing certain convicted people from entering mineral areas. Knowingly breaching an exclusion order can attract up to 2 years imprisonment. Proposed s 238(2) places the burden on the defendant to establish a reasonable excuse, which the Committee identified as a reversal of the onus of proof affecting the presumption of innocence. The Bill also expands personal-information handling. Proposed s 254(12) allows the Secretary to disclose to a landholder information — including personal information — supplied by a person applying for a permit to enter that land. Proposed s 238P requires a record of small-scale licence applications and licences to be available for public inspection, with regulations able to prescribe what information must appear on that record. Proposed s 268C additionally permits the Secretary to collect, use and disclose personal information when determining whether to grant a licence. The scrutiny committee noted that the Bill does not limit the types of personal information that may be disclosed under s 254(12), while regulations can determine information placed on the publicly inspectable register. There is also a significant delegated-power issue. Proposed s 238A(5) permits regulations under the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 to modify how that Act applies to an appeal against an exclusion order. The Legislation Review Committee identified this as a potential Henry VIII clause because regulations made by the Executive may alter how primary legislation operates — importantly, in this case, legislation governing a person’s appeal rights. Finally, the entire Act would commence on a day or days chosen by proclamation, rather than automatically on assent or on a fixed statutory date. The Committee referred this to Parliament because the Bill creates offences carrying imprisonment and therefore affects individual rights and liberties. For ROAN/FERM, the issue is broader than opal mining. This is another example of relatively specialised regulatory legislation containing custodial strict-liability offences, reversed evidentiary burdens, broad personal-information powers and delegated Executive authority capable of modifying an appeal framework. Watching — introduced in the Legislative Assembly on 16 September 2026. Currently at second-reading stage.

Fisheries Management Amendment (Enforcement) Bill 2026

NSW Government bill strengthening enforcement under the Fisheries Management Act 1994. Although primarily presented as legislation targeting illegal fishing and black-market seafood, it also significantly expands investigative and coercive powers available to fisheries officers. The Bill creates new offences for purchasing fish from an unauthorised seller, expands information-gathering and search powers, permits recording of questioning, introduces additional surveillance-device powers and changes evidentiary and enforcement arrangements.

Sections: Proposed ss 34W–34X — offences for purchasing fish from unauthorised sellers and associated defences. Proposed s 258 — compulsory information concerning fish, fishing gear and records. Proposed s 259 — recording of questioning. Proposed s 259A — use of listening and optical surveillance devices. Amendment to s 260 — expanded search-warrant provisions.

Pillar 5 — individual rights / privacy / presumption of innocence. Pillar 7 — due process / evidentiary safeguards. Pillar 8 — regulatory and enforcement power / government accountability. Worth watching because some of the enforcement provisions go considerably further than the ordinary title suggests. Proposed s 34W creates strict-liability offences for purchasing fish from an unauthorised seller. For an individual, penalties can include imprisonment — rising to a maximum of 18 months for a second or subsequent aggravated offence. The NSW Legislation Review Committee specifically raised concern that a person could therefore face imprisonment without the prosecution being required to establish the ordinary mental element of fault. Proposed s 34X provides defences where, for example, the accused did not know and had no reasonable grounds to suspect that the seller was unauthorised. However, the accused must establish that defence. The Committee found that this effectively reverses the onus of proof and engages the presumption of innocence. The enforcement powers are also significant. Proposed s 258 allows fisheries officers to require people in specified circumstances to provide information concerning fish, fishing gear or records. A person cannot simply refuse because answering may incriminate them. Proposed s 259 permits questioning to be recorded by sound or audiovisual means once the person has been informed, despite other laws that might otherwise restrict the recording. The amendments to s 260 broaden search-warrant powers to include offences reasonably believed to have been committed or to occur in the future. Proposed s 259A also enables fisheries officers to use listening or optical surveillance devices when exercising their functions under exemptions contained in the Surveillance Devices Act 2007. Importantly, “fisheries officer” is not necessarily limited to a conventional departmental inspector. The existing Act permits appointment of statutory officers, public servants, persons employed by public authorities and persons prescribed by regulation. The NSW Legislation Review Committee referred four matters to Parliament: strict-liability offences carrying imprisonment, reversal of the onus of proof, wide regulatory powers affecting personal rights and liberties, and commencement by proclamation of the surveillance-device provision. For ROAN/FERM, the issue is not whether illegal commercial fishing should be investigated. It is the precedent created when a regulatory enforcement regime combines custodial penalties, reversed evidentiary burdens, compelled potentially self-incriminating information, surveillance and expanded search powers — particularly where the class of officials able to exercise powers can itself be expanded. Watching — introduced in the Legislative Council on 17 September 2026. Currently at second-reading stage.

Lobbying of Government Officials Amendment (Access and Influence) Bill 2026

NSW private member’s bill introduced by Kobi Shetty MP substantially expanding regulation of lobbying in New South Wales. It would broaden who counts as a public official and lobbyist, require greater public disclosure of lobbying activity, impose a four-year post-employment lobbying exclusion period on specified senior public officials and establish a new Lobbying and Integrity Commission. The proposed definition of public official extends beyond Ministers to MPs, parliamentary staff, public servants, statutory office holders, councillors, council employees and certain government and council contractors. The definition of lobbying is also broadened to include people lobbying on their own behalf.

Sections: Schedule 1 [12] — proposed Parts 1A–1C, establishing the Lobbying and Integrity Commission, Advisory Board and complaints framework. Schedule 1 [13] — replacement Parts 2–3, lobbying code and registration. Schedule 1 [17] — proposed Parts 6–6C, particularly ss 18–18C, 18D onwards and ss 18M–18T — four-year lobbying exclusion period; disclosure requirements; enforcement; entry, search and seizure; compulsory information and evidence; self-incrimination provisions.

Pillar 8 — political integrity / lobbying transparency / government accountability. Pillar 5 — privacy / property rights / due process. There is a strong transparency side to the Bill. It would require greater disclosure of who is lobbying government and includes political fundraising events involving payment for private or exclusive access within the lobbying-disclosure framework. Former senior public officials would generally be prohibited from lobbying public officials for four years after leaving their position, and a public register of restricted individuals would be maintained. But the enforcement powers deserve close attention. Proposed s 18P allows an authorised person investigating a lobbying complaint to enter and inspect non-residential premises without a warrant or consent, examine, seize, keep or remove relevant equipment, require people at the premises to answer questions and require production of records. Residential premises retain additional protections requiring consent or a search warrant. Proposed s 18S allows the Commission to compel a person to provide information or documents or appear and give evidence. Failure to comply without reasonable excuse carries a maximum penalty of 200 penalty units. Proposed s 18T also removes the ordinary ability to refuse to comply merely because an answer, information or document may incriminate the person or expose them to a penalty. Limited use-immunity protections apply to certain compelled information and answers. The NSW Legislation Review Committee specifically referred both the broad powers affecting privacy and property rights and the self-incrimination provisions to Parliament for consideration. It also noted that “authorised persons” exercising some investigative powers could include people prescribed later by regulation, not only Commission staff. For ROAN/FERM, this creates an interesting balance. Greater visibility of who has private access to Ministers, MPs, senior officials and councils is strongly relevant to political accountability. But creating an integrity regulator with warrantless entry powers, seizure powers, compulsory questioning and abrogation of self-incrimination protections raises a separate accountability question about the regulator itself. Watching — introduced in the Legislative Assembly on 24 September 2026. Second-reading debate adjourned. Its lapsing date was extended by resolution of the House on 14 October to 27 November 2026.

Freedom of Information and Other Legislation Amendment (Stop the Financial Coercion) Bill 2026

Private senator’s bill introduced by Senator Jacqui Lambie seeking to remove a major financial barrier faced by people challenging government secrecy under Freedom of Information laws. Where the Commonwealth itself appeals an FOI decision of the Administrative Review Tribunal or Australian Information Commissioner, the Bill would require the Commonwealth to pay the reasonable costs incurred by the other party or parties to that appeal.

Sections: Schedule 1 — proposed s 175A of the Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 and proposed s 56(7) of the Freedom of Information Act 1982 — Commonwealth liability for reasonable costs where the Commonwealth institutes an FOI appeal.

Pillar 5 — access to information / individual rights. Pillar 7 — access to review and justice. Pillar 8 — government transparency / accountability. Worth watching because a person may successfully obtain a decision requiring government information to be released, only for the Commonwealth to appeal that decision and expose the person to substantial legal costs. The possibility of those costs can itself discourage individuals, journalists and community organisations from pursuing information they are legally entitled to seek. The actual Bill text is important. It does not appear to make Commonwealth liability dependent on the Government ultimately losing the appeal. Proposed s 175A and s 56(7) state that where the appeal is instituted by or on behalf of the Commonwealth, the Commonwealth is liable for the reasonable costs incurred by the other party or parties. The protection would also apply to Commonwealth-initiated appeals already underway when the amendments commence, provided they have not yet been finally determined. For ROAN/FERM, this goes directly to practical government accountability. A statutory right to seek government information has limited value if the financial risk of defending a favourable FOI decision can effectively prevent ordinary people from exercising it. Watching — introduced in the Senate on 14 October 2026 and currently before the Senate.

Child Support and Family Assistance Legislation Amendment (Ending Financial Abuse in the Child Support Scheme No. 1) Bill 2026

Federal Government bill aimed at preventing the child-support system itself from being used as a mechanism for financial abuse, harassment or coercive control. It gives the Child Support Registrar new powers to refuse certain applications where proceeding may cause harm, summarily dismiss certain objections, change how sensitive information is exchanged between parties, expand government collection of child-support debts and arrears, and temporarily pause recovery of certain Family Tax Benefit debts.

Sections: Schedule 1 — reducing harmful use of the child-support scheme, including proposed s 30C, s 98FA and changes to objection and information-exchange arrangements. Schedule 2 — expanded collection of child-support debts, arrears and overpayments and access to Agency Collect. Schedule 3 — international child-support assessment arrangements.

Pillar 5 — privacy / family and financial rights. Pillar 7 — review rights / procedural fairness. Pillar 8 — administrative discretion / government accountability. Worth watching because the Bill addresses a genuine problem: administrative systems can themselves be weaponised by an abusive former partner through repeated applications, objections, demands for information or manipulation of payment arrangements. Proposed s 30C allows the Registrar to refuse an application for a child-support assessment in specified circumstances where the Registrar reasonably believes accepting it would cause harm to the other parent. Proposed s 98FA similarly permits the Registrar to stop a change-of-assessment application where allowing it to proceed would cause harm to a party, the child or another person. The Bill also changes the existing document-exchange system. Instead of automatically providing the other party with original documents, the Registrar may provide relevant information through oral or written summaries or copies with information or entire pages redacted. This may provide important protection for addresses, financial details and other sensitive information. But there is another side worth monitoring. The Registrar also receives considerable discretion to determine when an application may cause “harm”, what information another party receives, and when an objection has sufficiently little prospect of success to be dismissed without proceeding through the ordinary process. The Law Council of Australia supports the objective of reducing financial and systems abuse but has specifically raised concerns about procedural fairness, access to merits review and undefined terms governing some of these new discretions. For FERM, the important balance is between protecting victims from having government processes weaponised against them and ensuring administrative officials do not receive overly broad powers to refuse applications, restrict information or terminate review processes without adequate safeguards. Watching — introduced in the House of Representatives on 17 September 2026. Second-reading debate continued on 29 October 2026. Referred to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee, with report due 12 November 2026.

Health Legislation Amendment (Improved Medicare Integrity and Other Measures) Bill 2026

Federal Government bill introduced on 28 October 2026 strengthening compliance and enforcement powers across Medicare, the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme and related health-payment schemes. It introduces new civil-penalty, infringement-notice and enforceable-undertaking mechanisms, reforms offences, expands administrative inquiry and overpayment-recovery arrangements, changes the Professional Services Review framework and replaces the existing Medicare Participation Review process with new suspension and disqualification powers.

Sections: Schedule 1 — regulatory powers amendments, including civil penalties, infringement notices and enforceable undertakings. Schedule 2 — reform of offences and civil penalties. Schedule 3 — administrative inquiries and recovery of PBS overpayments. Schedule 4 — Professional Services Review Scheme. Schedule 5 — suspension and disqualification of practitioners.

Pillar 5 — individual rights / due process. Pillar 7 — review and procedural safeguards. Pillar 8 — regulatory power / government accountability. Worth watching because the Bill substantially expands the range of enforcement tools available to the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing. Instead of relying principally on voluntary compliance measures or more serious criminal processes, regulators would have additional intermediate mechanisms including civil penalties, infringement notices and enforceable undertakings. Schedule 3 strengthens information-gathering for PBS administrative inquiries and allows recovery of payments that did not meet statutory requirements. Schedule 4 gives the Professional Services Review additional enforcement machinery, including the ability for the PSR Director or a committee chair to seek civil penalty orders directly from the Federal Court. Schedule 5 is particularly worth noting. The Bill replaces the old Medicare Participation Review Committee process and allows action to be taken where a practitioner or entity has been charged or convicted of certain health-related offences. The Government's second-reading speech specifically gives the example of suspending a person from Medicare participation after being charged with a fraud-related offence involving Medicare or dental services. The Government states that procedural fairness and applicable review rights will continue to apply. For FERM, the important questions are the thresholds for suspension before conviction, the breadth of information-gathering and recovery powers, access to meaningful review, and whether the expanded administrative enforcement system remains proportionate. Watching — introduced in the House of Representatives on 28 October 2026 and currently before the House.

Agriculture Legislation Amendment (Biosecurity and Export Control) Bill 2026

Federal Government bill amending the Biosecurity Act 2015 and Export Control Act 2020. It strengthens and aligns the “fit and proper person” framework applying to participants in Australia’s import and export systems and substantially modernises investigation powers for electronic data, search and seizure. The fit-and-proper-person changes allow decision-makers to consider matters including serious outstanding criminal charges as well as convictions and penalties, broader financial circumstances, previous adverse compliance decisions and specified associates. The Bill also supports greater transferability of information between cross-border regulatory processes as part of the Government’s broader “tell us once” approach.

Sections: Schedule 1 — Fit and Proper Person: amendments to the Biosecurity Act 2015 and Export Control Act 2020, including fit-and-proper-person criteria, notification of changed circumstances and delegations. Schedule 2 — Search and Seizure: amendments applying additional electronic search, access, copying, movement, examination and seizure powers through the Regulatory Powers (Standard Provisions) Act 2014 framework.

Pillar 5 — privacy / personal information / due process. Pillar 8 — regulatory powers / information sharing / government accountability. Worth watching because the search-and-seizure amendments are specifically designed for modern digital environments. Existing investigators can already operate electronic equipment during authorised searches, but the Bill expands the machinery available where records are stored in email repositories, account-based platforms and cloud systems. The changes can enable investigators, during otherwise authorised searches, to access and copy electronic material and deal with data held through account-based or remotely accessible systems. Material obtained may support not only criminal investigations but also civil penalties and administrative regulatory action. The Government argues this removes the current need to rely as heavily on Crimes Act warrants and outside police assistance. The safeguards matter: these are not freestanding powers to enter any premises. Entry must still be authorised under existing legislation, including warrant arrangements and other existing statutory entry powers. However, once authorised entry occurs, the scope of electronic examination and seizure becomes significantly broader. Also worth noting is the connection with the wider “tell us once” policy already appearing elsewhere in Commonwealth legislation. Here, the Government expressly says the fit-and-proper-person reforms support information being transferable across cross-border trade agencies rather than applicants repeatedly supplying the same material. For ROAN/FERM, the key questions are how far investigators can follow data beyond the physical device found at the premises, what information may subsequently be shared between Commonwealth and State regulators, how long copied or seized data may be retained, and whether safeguards around privacy, relevance and use keep pace with the broader digital powers. Watching — introduced in the House of Representatives on 28 October 2026 and currently before the House.

Competition and Consumer Amendment (AER Inquiry Powers) Bill 2026

Federal Government bill establishing a new energy-market inquiry framework for the Australian Energy Regulator (AER). It allows the Energy Minister to require the AER to conduct an inquiry into the supply of energy-related goods or services, determine the scope and deadline of the inquiry and give directions about how it is conducted. The AER may use its existing compulsory information-gathering powers for these inquiries.

Sections: Schedule 1 — proposed Part XICAA of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010, beginning at s 153ZDA — energy-market inquiries; Ministerial directions and approvals; use of AER information-gathering powers; handling and disclosure of information; reporting and publication.

Pillar 8 — regulatory power / Ministerial discretion / accountability. Pillar 9 — energy / essential infrastructure / public resources. Worth watching because this creates a standing mechanism for the Commonwealth to investigate energy markets during price shocks, supply disruptions, infrastructure constraints or concerns about market conduct. The useful part is the transparency potential: the AER must generally report its findings and make reports publicly available. But the framework also gives the Energy Minister considerable control over an inquiry — including its scope, timing and directions concerning information — while allowing the AER to obtain information using existing compulsory statutory powers. For ROAN/FERM, the key questions are how independently the AER can investigate matters once an inquiry begins, what information can be kept confidential rather than published, to whom protected information can be disclosed, and whether Ministerial control over the inquiry framework is matched by adequate parliamentary and public oversight. Watching — introduced in the House of Representatives on 28 October 2026 and currently before the House.

Surveillance Devices Amendment (Public Interest Exceptions) Bill 2026

NSW Government legislation changing how unlawfully made surveillance recordings can be possessed, communicated and used. It creates a public-interest exception allowing certain recordings to be given to law-enforcement agencies, while also creating an offence where a person knowingly possesses an unlawfully made recording and fails to promptly give it to law enforcement in specified circumstances. The reforms were primarily aimed at allowing evidence of crime and corruption to reach bodies such as NSW Police, ICAC and the Law Enforcement Conduct Commission without the person providing the material automatically committing a surveillance-record offence. Passed — Royal Assent 7 April 2026. Act No. 7 of 2026.

Sections: Schedule 1 — ss 12 and 14A–14C — possession of unlawfully made surveillance records; public-interest disclosure to law enforcement; publication of previously public material; limits on police use of unlawfully obtained recordings. Section 63 — statutory review after five years.

Pillar 5 — privacy / individual rights / information. Pillar 8 — police, surveillance and government accountability. Worth recording because the Act sits directly at the boundary between privacy and accountability. On one side, it enables unlawfully made recordings to be used to expose serious crime, domestic violence, corruption and other wrongdoing. On the other, s 12 can impose penalties of up to five years imprisonment for an individual in circumstances involving possession of an unlawfully obtained recording and failure to promptly provide it to law enforcement. Sections 14A–14C also determine when unlawfully obtained material can subsequently be communicated or published and how police may use it. The final Act limits police use to specified offences and permits referral of relevant material to ICAC or the Law Enforcement Conduct Commission. For ROAN, the key issue is whether the balance between privacy, whistleblowing, evidence of wrongdoing and State access to surveillance material remains proportionate — particularly as recording technology becomes increasingly ubiquitous.

Environmental Planning and Assessment Amendment (Planning System Reforms) Bill 2025

Major NSW Government planning reform legislation that established the Housing Delivery Authority, centralised parts of development assessment and agency coordination, changed planning-panel arrangements, created a single community-participation framework and introduced a pathway for certain developments to receive a more targeted assessment. The Housing Delivery Authority can advise the Minister about housing supply, rezoning land for residential development, declaring developments State significant and changing who acts as the planning proposal authority. Passed — Royal Assent 24 November 2025. Act No. 71 of 2025.

Sections: Schedule 1 — particularly ss 2.11A–2.11D, 2.23–2.24 and 4.20A–4.20B — Housing Delivery Authority; rezoning and State-significant-development advice; centralised community participation; targeted assessment development and streamlined assessment pathways.

Pillar 2 — land / planning / property. Pillar 8 — government power / delegated planning authority / accountability. Worth recording because it significantly centralises NSW planning machinery and gives the Housing Delivery Authority an explicit role in recommending rezoning, State-significant development and changes to planning authority. It also creates “targeted assessment development”, where a State Environmental Planning Policy can declare particular development or classes of development subject to a narrower assessment pathway. Public exhibition can in some circumstances be set by the SEPP, including potentially no exhibition period for a targeted-assessment application. This sits alongside the separate Low and Mid-Rise Housing Policy, which changed planning controls within 800 metres walking distance of 171 nominated town centres and train/light-rail stations. The NSW Government describes those locations as areas with shops, services, public transport and infrastructure capacity. That policy is sometimes discussed publicly in “15-minute city” terms, but the official NSW framework does not call these 171 locations “15-minute cities”. The Government describes the policy as well-located housing around town centres and transport hubs; its 2025 announcement referred to an 800-metre or roughly 10-minute walk. For ROAN, the important issue is not the label. It is how much planning and rezoning authority moves away from individual councils and into State-level bodies, Ministers and State environmental planning policies, and how much meaningful community participation remains when development pathways are accelerated.

Planning and Environment Amendment (AI Data Centres Moratorium) Bill 2026

Victorian Greens proposal moved by Ellen Sandell MP seeking to amend the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to impose a moratorium on approvals for new hyperscale AI data centres in Victoria while stronger planning and environmental safeguards were developed. The proposal was aimed at concerns including electricity and water consumption, land use, community consultation, renewable-energy supply and the location of data centres near residential communities. Defeated — motion to introduce the Bill defeated 31–50 in the Victorian Legislative Assembly on 11 August 2026.

Sections: Proposed amendment to the Planning and Environment Act 1987 — moratorium on new AI data-centre approvals and proposed safeguards concerning energy, water, cultural heritage and community consultation. No bill sections formally proceeded because the motion to introduce the Bill was defeated.

Pillar 2 — land / planning. Pillar 8 — planning powers / government accountability. Pillar 9 — energy, water and public resources. Worth recording because Parliament was asked directly whether data-centre approvals should be paused until stronger safeguards were in place — and the proposal was defeated before the Bill could proceed. The issues have not disappeared. On 30 October 2026, the Municipal Association of Victoria, representing Victoria’s 79 councils, called for a moratorium on approvals for new and expanded data centres until a comprehensive planning and environmental framework is established. Councils have raised concerns about land, housing, electricity, water, infrastructure and the loss of local planning control. For ROAN, the useful question is whether governments should permit rapid expansion of extremely resource-intensive infrastructure first and establish the full safeguards later, or require the safeguards before approvals proceed.

Electricity Infrastructure Investment Amendment Bill 2026

NSW Government legislation aimed largely at managing the electricity-network impact of major new data centres and other large energy users. It allows the Minister to make regulations governing large-load connections, expands the electricity access-scheme framework to large users such as data centres, and creates mechanisms intended to ensure those projects contribute to the network upgrades their demand requires rather than shifting those costs onto ordinary electricity customers. Passed — Royal Assent 23 October 2026. Act No. 41 of 2026.

Sections: Schedule 1 [3]–[12], particularly ss 26–27 — large-load infrastructure access schemes; access fees; network-upgrade costs; Ministerial regulation-making powers; ability to modify application of the National Electricity Law and Rules for large energy users.

Pillar 8 — infrastructure planning / delegated power / accountability. Pillar 9 — electricity, water and resource capacity. Secondary Pillar 2 — land and infrastructure. This is directly relevant to the rapid growth of data centres in NSW. Parliament was told there were around 60 operating data centres in NSW with another 19 projects in the State Significant Development pipeline worth about $50.3 billion, while AEMO forecasts their share of NSW grid electricity rising from about 5% to around 11% by 2030. Worth watching because much of the practical scheme is still left to regulations, including connection requirements, capital contributions, fees, bonds and other financial security. Parliament also discussed the possibility of using the framework to influence where, when and how much large-load demand connects to the network. For ROAN, the key questions are who pays for the electricity infrastructure required by very large private data-centre developments, how much control Ministers and regulators retain through delegated rules, and whether communities receive a measurable benefit when scarce electricity, water and network capacity are allocated to these projects.

Right to Protest Bill 2025

Private senator’s bill sponsored by David Shoebridge seeking to create a federal statutory right to engage in peaceful protest in a public place. Restrictions would only be permitted where considered necessary in a democratic society for matters such as national security, public safety, public order, public health or protecting the rights and freedoms of others. Before Senate. Restored to the Notice Paper 23 July 2025; second-reading debate resumed 27 August 2025 and was adjourned for continuation.

Sections: Sections 5 and 9 — definition of “protest”, including political and disruptive action; protection of peaceful protest; permitted restrictions for national security, public safety, public order, public health and the rights of others; limits on unnecessary or excessive penalties.

Pillar 5 — freedom of expression / peaceful assembly. Pillar 8 — government and police power. Worth watching because the Bill would create an express statutory protection for peaceful protest rather than leaving the issue mainly to State and Territory protest laws, common-law principles and the implied freedom of political communication. The drafting also deserves scrutiny. Section 5 defines protest broadly enough to include actions that are “disruptive, or that seek to be disruptive”. Parliamentary debate has already raised questions about how that interacts with other people’s rights, public movement and existing State protest offences. For ROAN, the important question is where the line should sit between protecting genuine political protest and allowing governments to restrict conduct on public-order grounds, and who ultimately decides when a restriction is “necessary” or proportionate.

Constitution Alteration (Right to Free Speech) 2025

Private senator’s bill sponsored by Ralph Babet proposing to amend the Australian Constitution to expressly protect freedom of speech. It would provide that the Commonwealth or a State must not make a law limiting freedom of speech, including freedom of the press and other media. The Bill lapsed at the end of the previous Parliament but was restored to the Senate Notice Paper on 28 July 2025 and remains before the Senate. Before Senate. Restored to the Notice Paper on 28 July 2025.

Sections: Proposed Chapter IIIA and s 80A of the Constitution — constitutional protection preventing Commonwealth or State laws from limiting freedom of speech, including freedom of the press and other media.

Pillar 5 — rights and freedoms. Pillar 3 — referendum / direct democracy. Pillar 8 — limits on government power. This is directly relevant to ROAN because Australia does not currently contain an express general constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech. The Bill proposes to place such a protection directly in the Constitution rather than relying only on statute, common law and the implied freedom of political communication. Because this is a proposed constitutional alteration, Parliament cannot by itself make the change permanent: if the proposal progresses through Parliament, the constitutional alteration would ultimately require approval by the Australian people at a referendum. Worth watching both the breadth of the proposed protection and whether Parliament allows Australians to vote on it.

Title Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Reform No. 3) Bill 2026 & Minimum Tax on Discretionary Trusts Bill 2026 — Referral to Committee

A motion was moved to refer the Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Reform No. 3) Bill 2026 and its companion Income Tax Rates Amendment (Minimum Tax on Discretionary Trusts) Bill 2026 to the House Standing Committee on Economics for consideration and an advisory report by 1 July 2027

Sections: Schedules 1–6 — discretionary-trust minimum tax; restructuring rollover; electable trust regime; CGT amendments; negative-gearing amendments; Payday Super transitional relief.

Pillar 8 — parliamentary scrutiny / accountability. Secondary Pillar 5 — taxation and financial rights. Worth recording because this was not a vote against the tax legislation itself. It was a vote against sending the two bills to the House Economics Committee for an additional inquiry and advisory report. That matters because the same Tax Reform No. 3 package was later criticised over its compressed timetable and the amount of operative detail still to be supplied through later rules and legislative instruments. Kristy McBain voted against the additional committee referral on 14 October, then voted for Tax Reform No. 3 when it later came before the House. Referral motion defeated 46–87 on 14 October 2026.

Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Reform No. 4) Bill 2026 — Third Reading

Final House vote on Tax Reform No. 4, covering the new innovative-business CGT concession, changes to the R&D tax incentive, venture-capital concessions, PAYG instalments and electric-vehicle fringe-benefits tax changes.

Sections: Schedules 1–5 — innovative-business CGT concession; R&D tax incentive; venture-capital incentives; PAYG instalments; electric-vehicle fringe-benefits tax.

ROAN link / what’s worth watching Pillar 5 — taxation / private investment / financial rights. Pillar 8 — delegated power and government accountability. Worth recording separately from the bill entry because this gives Eden-Monaro constituents a direct record of how their MP voted on another substantial Treasury package. The Bill is particularly relevant to ROAN because several different tax measures are bundled together, while parts of the R&D framework can still be shaped later by legislative instrument. One useful detail: Kristy was absent for the second-reading division earlier that day, but she was present and voted FOR the third reading.

Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Reform No. 3) Bill 2026 — Third Reading

Final House vote on the Tax Reform No. 3 Bill, which includes the discretionary-trust minimum tax, restructuring and election mechanisms, CGT and negative-gearing changes, and Payday Super transitional relief.

Sections: Schedules 1–6 — discretionary-trust minimum tax; restructuring rollover; electable trust regime; CGT amendments; negative-gearing amendments; Payday Super transitional relief.

Worth recording separately from the bill entry because this gives Eden-Monaro constituents a direct record of how their MP voted on a substantial tax package affecting trusts, investment property, CGT, negative gearing and superannuation. This is especially relevant because the broader scrutiny issue we already logged for the Bill concerns the compressed timetable and important parts of the trust regime being left to later rules and legislative instruments. Passed the House 91–46 on 29 October 2026. Kristy McBain is individually recorded among the Ayes.

Treasury Laws Amendment (The Survivors Law) Bill 2026

Federal Government legislation allowing victims and survivors of specified child sexual abuse offences to obtain information about, and in certain circumstances access, amounts held in a perpetrator’s superannuation to satisfy unpaid compensation orders. It also ensures qualifying compensation debts are not extinguished by bankruptcy.

Sections: Schedule 1 — proposed Division 139 of the Taxation Administration Act 1953, particularly ss 139-10–139-170 — access to perpetrator superannuation information, court release orders and payment mechanisms. Bankruptcy Act s 153 — qualifying compensation debts survive bankruptcy.

Pillar 5 — victims’ rights / property and financial rights. Pillar 7 — access to justice. Pillar 8 — government accountability. Worth recording because it changes the ordinary protection surrounding superannuation where a convicted child sexual abuser owes court-ordered compensation. The mechanism still requires judicial involvement: a survivor obtains superannuation information and may then seek a court order authorising release of eligible amounts. Kristy McBain spoke in support of the Bill during the House second-reading debate on 13 May 2026. This makes it particularly relevant to the Eden-Monaro FERM record rather than simply another national bill. Passed — Royal Assent 20 May 2026. Act No. 47 of 2026. Passed both Houses on 14 May 2026.

Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Reform No. 4) Bill 2026

Federal Government bill introduced on 27 October 2026 containing another broad tax package. It creates a new Innovative Business CGT Concession, restructures the Research and Development Tax Incentive, expands existing venture-capital tax concessions, changes PAYG instalment arrangements, and begins winding back the fringe-benefits-tax concession for eligible electric vehicles.

Sections: Schedules 1–5 — innovative-business CGT concession; R&D tax incentive; venture-capital incentives; PAYG instalments; electric-vehicle fringe-benefits tax.

Pillar 5 — taxation / private investment / financial rights. Pillar 8 — delegated power and government accountability. Worth watching because it again packages several substantially different tax policies into one bill. Some measures provide new concessions — including a 50% CGT concession for qualifying early investment in innovative businesses — while others tighten or withdraw existing concessions. The R&D provisions are particularly worth monitoring. The Bill changes what qualifies for the R&D tax incentive and also permits some activities integral to core R&D to be designated later by legislative instrument, with further consultation promised in 2027. That means part of the practical scope of the scheme will again depend on delegated rules made after Parliament considers the primary legislation. Schedule 4 also gives the Tax Commissioner power to require taxpayers with a “demonstrated history of non-compliance” to move from quarterly to monthly PAYG instalments. The phrase and the circumstances in which that power will be exercised are worth watching closely. Watching — passed the House of Representatives on 29 October 2026; now progressing to the Senate. The third reading passed 96–38.The House vote is also notable: Labor and most crossbenchers supported it; Liberal, Nationals and One Nation members voting opposed it.

Treasury Laws Amendment (Removing the Widows and Spouses Tax) Bill 2026

Private senators’ bill sponsored by Matthew Canavan and David Pocock. It seeks to preserve existing grandfathered negative-gearing and 50% CGT-discount treatment where ownership of residential property changes because of the death of a joint owner, divorce or relationship breakdown. Without an exception, a person receiving the other owner’s interest can lose the grandfathered tax treatment even though the property itself has not been newly purchased as an investment.

Sections: Proposed ss 26-156, 26-157 and 26-158 — Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 — preservation of grandfathered tax treatment following death, divorce or relationship breakdown.

Pillar 5 — property / family / estate rights. Pillar 8 — taxation and government accountability. Worth watching because it highlights an unintended consequence of the Government’s broader changes to negative gearing and capital gains tax. A surviving spouse or separating partner could otherwise lose a grandfathered tax position simply because legal ownership changes following death or relationship breakdown, rather than because they chose to make a new investment. It is also useful from a scrutiny perspective because separate corrective legislation became necessary after the original reforms were passed. The Government subsequently acknowledged the issue and developed its own proposed amendments, so the important thing to monitor is which corrective mechanism ultimately becomes law and whether it fully protects transfers caused by death and family breakdown. Before Senate. Introduced 13 August 2026; first reading completed and second reading moved the same day.

Treasury Laws Amendment (Building a Stronger and Fairer Super System) Bill 2026

Federal Government legislation reducing superannuation tax concessions for people with large balances. From the 2026–27 income year, earnings attributable to the portion of a total super balance above $3 million attract an additional 15% tax, while the portion above $10 million attracts an additional 25%. Both thresholds are indexed. Unlike the earlier proposal, the final scheme is based on realised earnings rather than unrealised gains. It also increases the Low Income Super Tax Offset threshold and maximum payment.

Sections: Schedule 1 — Division 296 — additional tax on large and very large super balances. Schedules 2–3 — total super balance and related amendments. Schedule 4 — Low Income Super Tax Offset changes.

Pillar 5 — private retirement savings / financial rights. Pillar 8 — taxation and government accountability. Worth recording because it is a significant change to the taxation of privately accumulated superannuation, and because the legislation specifically allows Division 296 to apply in the year of death where a person dies on or after 1 July 2027. This is the basis of some of the current discussion describing the measure as a “death tax on super”. That description is politically loaded — it is not a general inheritance or estate tax — but there is a genuine estate-planning issue underneath it. A surviving spouse may also be affected where receiving superannuation following a death pushes their own total super balance above one of the Division 296 thresholds. For FERM, the relevant point is the expanding taxation framework around superannuation balances, death and intergenerational transfer, rather than the slogan attached to it. Passed — Royal Assent 13 March 2026. Act No. 8 of 2026. The companion Superannuation (Building a Stronger and Fairer Super System) Imposition Act 2026 imposes the additional tax.

Superannuation Legislation Amendment (Fair Super for Young Workers) Bill 2026

Private senator’s bill sponsored by Barbara Pocock. Under the current superannuation guarantee rules, employees under 18 generally only become entitled to compulsory employer super contributions for weeks in which they work more than 30 hours. This Bill would remove that hours threshold so compulsory super would apply to employees under 18 regardless of how many hours they work.

Sections: Superannuation Guarantee (Administration) Act 1992 — s 10A(3) and related regulations — removal of the existing under-18 / 30-hours-per-week exemption. The change would commence the day after Royal Assent.

Pillar 5 — personal earnings / financial rights. Pillar 8 — compulsory statutory systems. There is a reasonable argument for equal treatment: a 16- or 17-year-old doing paid work is earning money in the same way as an adult worker, and the existing hours threshold means many casual young workers receive no compulsory super. The counter-question is the effect of extending another compulsory employment cost to all under-18 workers, particularly those working only a few hours a week. Employer groups have raised concerns about the cumulative cost and administrative impact alongside Payday Super and other workplace changes, while payroll-industry submissions have argued that removing the age-and-hours test could eventually simplify payroll but would still require significant system changes during implementation. For FERM, the useful point is not simply “super for teenagers”; it is the broader question of where compulsory retirement saving should begin, how young workers’ earnings are treated, and what obligations government places on employers for very small amounts of casual work.

Commonwealth Land (Affordable Housing) Bill 2026

Private senator’s bill sponsored by David Pocock establishing an affordable-housing framework for Commonwealth land sold or leased for residential development. It would generally require 30% of dwellings built on relevant Commonwealth land to be affordable housing, with rents capped at the lower of 75% of market rent or 30% of household income. The affordable dwellings would generally be managed by registered not-for-profit community housing providers.

Sections: ss 10–17 — affordable-housing condition on Commonwealth land disposals; registered housing instrument; 30% dwelling requirement; rent and household-income limits; management and enforcement. Part 4 — exemptions for certain land, including small, contaminated, low-demand or otherwise unsuitable sites.

Pillar 2 — land. Pillar 8 — public assets / government accountability. Pillar 9 — public benefit from nationally owned assets.Particularly relevant because it deals directly with what happens when Commonwealth-owned land is transferred into private development. Instead of disposing of public land without an ongoing housing obligation, the Bill would attach an affordable-housing condition to the land and require that obligation to be secured through a recognised housing instrument before settlement. Also worth watching is the regulation-making power. The Bill sets 30% as the default affordable-housing requirement, but regulations could prescribe a different proportion or exempt certain land. That makes the later delegated rules just as important as the headline figure itself. Before Senate. Senate Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee report due 23 November 2026.

Residential Tenancies Amendment (Rent Control) Bill 2026

NSW private member’s bill introduced by Jenny Leong proposing major changes to residential rent regulation. It would impose a 12-month rent freeze, followed by a 2% annual cap on rent increases, extend the cap across changes of tenant, prevent rent increases where repair obligations remain outstanding, expand tenants’ ability to seek rent reductions through NCAT, and introduce stronger rights to two-year fixed-term tenancies.

Sections: ss 41A, 41, 22A, 42 and 44 — rent freeze; 2% annual cap; vacancy control between tenancies; Tribunal approval for larger increases; tenant applications for rent reduction. ss 17A–18A, 96 and 100 — two-year fixed-term tenancy rights and expanded termination rights for tenants.

Pillar 5 — property / housing rights. Pillar 8 — government regulation. Legislative Assembly, second reading stage. Scheduled to lapse on 6 November 2026 unless it progresses. The Bill was introduced on 22 October 2026. An attempt that day to extend its lapsing date to 28 November did not succeed. Worth watching because it substantially changes the legal balance between owners and renters. The Bill would regulate not only rent increases during an existing tenancy but also what can be charged after a tenant leaves, meaning the cap effectively attaches to the property, not simply the tenant. It also proposes a retrospective element: the initial freeze would reach back to July 2026, potentially requiring certain additional rent already collected to be returned. There are real competing interests here: rental affordability and security of tenure on one side, and owners’ control over rent, investment returns and property arrangements on the other. That makes the mechanism — not just the political argument around rent control — the part worth recording for FERM.

Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Reform No. 3) Bill 2026

Federal Government bill containing a broad package of tax changes. It introduces a minimum tax on discretionary trusts, provides associated restructuring rollover relief and an electable trust regime, makes further changes to the Government’s CGT and negative-gearing reforms, and provides transitional relief connected with Payday Super. The Bill was introduced on 14 October 2026 and has been referred to the Senate Economics Legislation Committee.

Sections: Schedules 1–6 — discretionary-trust minimum tax; restructuring rollover; electable trust regime; CGT amendments; negative-gearing amendments; Payday Super transitional relief.

ROAN link / what’s worth watching Pillar 5 — property / financial rights. Pillar 8 — taxation, delegated legislation and parliamentary scrutiny. Particularly worth watching because several substantial tax reforms are bundled into one bill, while parts of the discretionary-trust regime still depend on rules, regulations and legislative instruments that had not yet been released when submissions closed. The Tax Institute described the trust measures as among the most significant changes in decades and argued that Schedules 1–3 should not pass until the deferred material is available for scrutiny.

Parliamentary Budget Officer Amendment Bill (No 2) 2026

NSW Government legislation temporarily bringing Pauline Hanson’s One Nation within the Parliamentary Budget Office election-costing regime for the 2027 NSW election. It treats the publicly recognised NSW One Nation leader as a “parliamentary leader” for this purpose, requiring One Nation election commitments with budget impacts to be submitted for costing and included in a budget impact statement. It also permanently allows NSW Government agencies to share information with one another when responding to Parliamentary Budget Officer costing requests where authorised by the Parliamentary Budget Officer. The temporary One Nation provisions cease after the 2027 NSW State election and do not confer broader parliamentary rights on One Nation. The arrangements are intended to ensure voters can see independent costings of One Nation’s election policies in the same way they can for the Government and Opposition. Passed — Parliament passed the Bill on 22 October 2026. Royal Assent 28 October 2026. Act No. 53 of 2026.

Sections: Schedule 1 [1]–[3] — particularly s 3 definitions, s 16 government-agency information access/sharing and s 18 election costing requests. Schedule 2 [1]–[2] removes the temporary One Nation provisions following the 2027 State election.

Pillar 6 — electoral system. Pillar 8 — political transparency and accountability. This is worth recording because NSW Parliament has effectively recognised One Nation as a sufficiently credible potential contender for government in 2027 to subject it to the same full-election-costing scrutiny applied to the Government and Opposition, despite One Nation currently having no NSW parliamentary members. The measure is explicitly temporary and does not give One Nation broader parliamentary rights.

Social Media Minimum Age Repeal Bill 2025

Private senator’s bill sponsored by Ralph Babet, with Pauline Hanson and Malcolm Roberts among its co-sponsors. It would repeal the Commonwealth social-media minimum-age regime introduced in 2024, including the obligation on age-restricted social-media platforms to take reasonable steps to prevent under-16 users from holding accounts. It remains before the Senate.

Sections: Schedule 1, particularly repeal of Part 4A of the Online Safety Act 2021, consequential amendments to definitions and enforcement provisions, and the related amendment to the Age Discrimination Act 2004.

Pillar 5 — privacy / parental and individual rights. Pillar 8 — regulatory power. Worth watching because it directly contests the existing age-restriction and age-assurance framework. Questions include parental authority, children's online safety, privacy and age verification, and how much personal information people should have to provide merely to access online services.

Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (Domestic Reserve) Bill 2026

Private senator’s bill sponsored by Pauline Hanson, introduced on 10 March 2026. It would require petroleum production licensees operating under the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Act to enter domestic reserve agreements with the Commonwealth. It remains before the Senate.

Sections: Amendment to s 95 and proposed new s 162A, particularly the domestic-reserve agreement requirement. As introduced, the proposal would require licensees to reserve an amount equivalent to 15% of the petroleum or gas exported in the previous year.

Pillar 9 — Australian resources / public benefit. Pillar 8 — government oversight. Worth watching because it goes directly to the question of whether Australian petroleum and gas resources should carry an enforceable domestic-supply obligation rather than relying principally on export markets.

Plebiscite (Future Migration Level) Bill 2018

Private senator’s bill sponsored by Pauline Hanson establishing a framework for a national plebiscite, intended to be held with a general election, asking Australians whether the current rate of immigration is too high. Although originally introduced in 2018 and defeated at earlier second-reading stages, it was restored to the Senate Notice Paper on 24 November 2025 and remains listed as Before Senate.

Sections: Sections 5–6 — plebiscite question and determination of the result; also provisions governing conduct of the plebiscite and broadcaster obligations during the campaign.

Pillar 3 — popular initiative / direct democracy. Pillar 6 — electoral machinery. This is unusually relevant to ROAN because it proposes putting a substantive national policy question directly to electors rather than leaving the decision solely to Parliament. Worth watching both the direct-democracy mechanism and the design of the question itself. The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights also examined implications for freedom of expression and the broadcaster requirements.

National Commission for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children and Young People Bill 2026

Federal Government legislation making the National Commission for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children and Young People a permanent statutory agency and the National Commissioner a statutory officer. Its functions include advising the Commonwealth, public advocacy, research, coordinating government responses to systemic issues and conducting inquiries concerning Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people. It passed both Houses on 25 March 2026 and received Royal Assent on 26 March 2026 as Act No. 14 of 2026.

Sections: Sections 11 and 39–54, particularly ss 39–44; also ss 63–65

Pillar 5 — privacy / due process. Pillar 8 — statutory bodies / government accountability. Worth knowing because the National Commissioner has significant information-gathering powers. Under **ss 39–43**, a person can be required to provide information or documents or appear to answer questions, with civil penalties for non-compliance. **Section 44** removes the ordinary right to refuse on self-incrimination grounds, although protections restrict the subsequent use of that information. Sections **47–54** govern circumstances in which information may be used or disclosed, including disclosures to Commonwealth, State and Territory entities and law-enforcement bodies. The Senate Scrutiny of Bills Committee specifically examined privacy, self-incrimination, immunity and rule-making issues. The legislation is **not the constitutional Voice rejected at the 2023 referendum**. However, it is relevant context that, following that referendum, the Commonwealth has continued establishing Indigenous-specific statutory advisory and representative bodies through ordinary legislation. This makes the scope, powers, accountability and parliamentary oversight of those bodies worth tracking.

Aged Care Legislation Amendment (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Aged Care Commissioner and Other Measures) Bill 2026

Federal Government bill establishing a permanent statutory Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Aged Care Commissioner within the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission. The Commissioner would advise government, undertake advocacy and other functions concerning aged-care access and services for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. The Bill also makes a range of other aged-care administrative and regulatory changes. It remains before the House of Representatives.

Sections: Schedule 1, particularly item 15 — proposed ss 361A–361G; especially ss 361D–361G

Pillar 8 — statutory bodies / appointments / ministerial accountability. Secondary Pillar 5 — rights and information. Worth watching because it creates another permanent statutory office with a direct advisory relationship to government. The Commissioner would prepare annual work plans, request information and advise the System Governor. Proposed s 361G permits the Minister to give the Commissioner general directions by legislative instrument, and those directions are not subject to parliamentary disallowance. Parliamentary scrutiny committees have also raised issues relating to aspects of the Bill.

Regulatory Reform Omnibus Bill 2026

Federal Government omnibus legislation amending numerous Commonwealth Acts as part of the Government's regulatory reform program. Among other measures, it expands the Government's “tell us once” approach so information already supplied to government can be used across government processes. Schedule 3 includes changes to the Healthcare Identifiers Act 2010 concerning disclosure of identifying information to healthcare providers and health-administration entities, including employees and contracted service providers in specified circumstances. The Bill passed Parliament and received Royal Assent on 18 September 2026, becoming the Regulatory Reform Omnibus Act 2026.

Sections: Schedule 3 — Amendments to support a Tell-Us-Once approach; particularly Part 2, items 16–23 — Healthcare Identifiers Act 2010

Pillar 5 — privacy / personal information. Pillar 8 — government administration / accountability. Worth knowing because a very broad “regulatory reform” Act also contains changes concerning government information-sharing and health identifiers. Schedule 3 Part 2 permits specified identifying information to be disclosed to health-administration entities and clarifies circumstances in which employees and contracted service providers can receive information. The important questions are what information may move between entities, for what purpose, who may access it, data accuracy and whether individuals can readily discover and correct information held about them.

Environmental Planning and Assessment Amendment (Defence Lands Parliamentary Approval) Bill 2026

NSW private member's bill requiring approval by both Houses of NSW Parliament before specified Defence sites can be rezoned or have planning controls materially changed in ways that allow significant changes in development, use, subdivision, density, scale or intensity. The Bill has been referred to a parliamentary committee for inquiry and report.

Sections: Schedule 1 [1] — proposed Division 3.7, ss 3.47–3.55, particularly ss 3.50–3.55

Pillar 2 — land / property rights. Pillar 8 — parliamentary oversight / government power. Worth watching because proposed s 3.51 requires both Houses to approve protected planning actions, while s 3.52 makes an unapproved action ineffective. Proposed s 3.54 says compensation is not payable merely because the restrictions affect the value or development potential of the land, subject to existing just-terms acquisition rights. It creates unusually strong parliamentary control over planning decisions involving specified Defence sites.

National Parks and Wildlife Amendment (Land Boundaries and Acquisitions) Bill 2026 (No 2)

NSW private member's bill placing additional conditions on government acquisition of land under the National Parks and Wildlife Act. Before acquiring land, the Minister would need a report covering the economic impact on the local area and the intended environmental benefit. The Bill also requires a five-year review and restricts acquisitions unless fencing-cost arrangements and compensation for lost council revenue are addressed. It remains before the Legislative Assembly.

Sections: Schedule 1 — proposed ss 146A–146B

Pillar 2 — land / custodianship / property. Pillar 8 — accountability. Worth watching because it would require government to document both the economic and environmental case before acquiring land for national parks, involve local councils and review whether the acquisition achieved its stated objectives after five years. Proposed s 146B also prevents acquisition unless boundary-fencing costs and lost council revenue are dealt with.

Mining and Petroleum Legislation Amendment (Land Access) Bill 2026

NSW Government bill changing the process by which mineral and petroleum exploration title holders negotiate access to land. It changes negotiation, mediation and arbitration procedures, site inspections, costs and reporting requirements for access arrangements under the Mining Act and Petroleum (Onshore) Act. It remains before the Legislative Assembly.

Sections: Schedule 1 [1], [5]–[13], [17]; Schedule 2 [5], [7]–[16], [20]–[22]

Pillar 2 — land / property rights / resource access. Pillar 8 — regulatory accountability. Worth watching because it controls how exploration companies gain practical access to land where mining or petroleum rights exist. The Bill changes when negotiations and mediation begin and end, what happens when mediation fails, who may accompany an arbitrator onto land, how costs are allocated and what information exploration title holders must report. That makes the balance between landholder rights and resource-development rights the key issue.

Electricity Legislation Amendment Bill 2026

NSW Government bill creating a statutory 20-year NSW electricity system plan, expanding EnergyCo's planning role, requiring information sharing by electricity network operators, creating new electrical-system safety and investigation powers, and allowing regulations concerning remote de-energisation and re-energisation of premises. It also allows regulations to modify how parts of the National Electricity Law and National Electricity Rules apply in NSW. It is currently in second-reading debate in the Legislative Assembly.

Sections: Schedule 1 [7] — proposed ss 58A–58D; Schedule 2 [1] — proposed Part 5F, particularly ss 63ZE and 63ZJ; Schedule 2 [7]

Pillar 8 — delegated power / accountability / major infrastructure planning. Worth watching proposed s 58D, which is a Henry VIII provision allowing regulations to modify the application of the National Electricity Law or National Electricity Rules in NSW. Also worth watching the 20-year system plan, compulsory information-sharing arrangements, investigation powers, and regulation-making around remote de-energisation and re-energisation of customer premises.

Public Health Amendment (Immunisation) Bill 2026

NSW private member's bill changing immunisation requirements under the Public Health Act. It would restrict certain vaccine-preventable-disease requirements to primary schools and allow an unvaccinated child to enrol in childcare in specified circumstances where a parent records a conscientious belief and an authorised practitioner confirms the parent has been informed about the benefits and risks of immunisation. It remains before the Legislative Council.

Sections: Schedule 1 [1]–[5], particularly Public Health Act ss 85–88 and s 87

Pillar 5 — individual rights / bodily autonomy / informed consent. Worth watching because it directly addresses the balance between public-health requirements, parental choice, informed consent and access to childcare. The key provision is the proposed amendment to s 87 allowing an alternative certificate based on conscientious belief after professional advice about immunisation risks and benefits.

Health Services Amendment (Splitting of the Murrumbidgee Local Health District) Bill 2026

NSW private member's bill proposing to split the existing Murrumbidgee Local Health District into the Murrumbidgee Local Health District and a new Western Riverina Local Health District. It also allows assets, rights and liabilities of the existing district to be transferred between the two new districts by ministerial order. It is currently before the Legislative Assembly.

Sections: Schedule 1 [1]–[3], particularly Schedule 1 [3] — dissolution of the existing district and transfer of assets, rights and liabilities.

Pillar 8 — accountability / regional governance / ministerial power. Worth watching because the Minister may transfer public health assets, rights and liabilities by order. The Bill also says those transfers are not to be treated as certain contractual breaches or civil wrongs, and no compensation is payable merely because of the transfer. The wider question is whether splitting the health district improves regional services and accountability or mainly restructures administration.

Housing Australia Amendment (Transparency and Reporting) Bill 2026

Federal private senator's bill requiring Housing Australia to publish detailed quarterly reports covering government housing expenditure, projects receiving assistance, guarantees, Help to Buy arrangements, administration and consultancy costs, and summarised board minutes. It remains before the Senate.

Sections: Schedule 1, items 1–4; proposed s 8(2) and s 10A

Pillar 8 — government spending, transparency and accountability. Worth watching because very large amounts of public money flow through Commonwealth housing programs. Proposed s 10A would require quarterly reporting so Parliament and the public can see where money is going, how many projects are actually receiving support and what administrative and consultancy costs are being incurred.

Diplomatic Appointments (Selection Process) Bill 2026

Federal private senator's bill creating a formal selection process for certain senior diplomatic appointments. It would introduce independent selection committees and restrictions on people with recent political affiliations, including a proposed 10-year exclusion period for recent parliamentarians from designated diplomatic posts. It remains before the Senate.

Sections: 7–16, particularly ss 7–9 and 11–13

Pillar 8 — appointments, integrity and executive accountability. Worth watching because it directly addresses political appointments and attempts to replace broad executive discretion with a more transparent merit-based process. The key question is whether the selection committees genuinely improve accountability without simply creating another appointment structure controlled indirectly by government.

Broadcasting Services Amendment (Register of Media Interests) Bill 2026

Federal private senator's bill requiring ACMA to establish a public Register of Media Interests. Media organisations would have to disclose certain financial and other interests of executives, directors, journalists, presenters and other relevant people where those interests could create a conflict or bias in reporting. It is currently before the Senate.

Sections: Schedule 1, item 1 — proposed s 216F; Schedule 1, item 2 — new Schedule 9, particularly clauses 3–8

Pillar 8 — transparency, influence and accountability. Worth watching because it would make financial and other interests behind media organisations and journalists more visible to the public. But it also raises questions about privacy, what counts as a relevant interest, ACMA's powers, penalties for non-disclosure and whether the register could be applied unevenly.

Electoral Legislation Amendment (Electoral Communications) Bill 2025 (No. 2)

Federal private senator's bill dealing with misleading election material and AI-generated or digitally altered electoral content. It would require disclosure where digital technology such as AI has been used, prohibit materially misleading electoral communications, create an Electoral Communications Panel and remove the final three-day broadcast advertising blackout. It remains before the Senate.

Sections: Schedule 1 — proposed electoral communications provisions, particularly ss 321R and 321RC

ROAN Pillar 6 — electoral system. Pillar 8 — political integrity and accountability. Worth watching because it attempts to regulate misleading political communication and AI/deepfake election material. Also worth watching the powers of the proposed Electoral Communications Panel, privacy implications of investigations and whether rules intended to combat misinformation could affect legitimate political speech. Parliamentary scrutiny has specifically identified privacy concerns around proposed s 321RC.

Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2026

Federal Government bill changing social security, family assistance and child-support administration. It gives a legal basis for automated advance payments, changes some decisions while matters are under review at the Administrative Review Tribunal, and expands use of ATO pre-issue income data for family assistance, childcare subsidy and child support.

Sections: Schedules 1–5, particularly Schedule 1 — automated advance payments; Schedule 2 — ART review decisions; Schedules 3–5 — pre-issue income data and child-support calculations

Pillar 5 — rights and due process. Pillar 7 — review rights. Pillar 8 — automated government decision-making and accountability. Worth watching because the apparently “technical” Bill gives legislative backing to automation and wider use of income data in government payment decisions. The important questions are human review, accuracy of data, appeal rights and whether automated decisions remain properly accountable.

Defence Legislation Amendment (RCDVS Implementation and Related Measures No. 2) Bill 2026

Federal Defence bill responding mainly to the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide. It also creates new rules allowing collection, use and disclosure of personal, sensitive and health information about serving and former ADF members and their families, creates a statutory Defence health system and changes some Freedom of Information arrangements. It has passed the House and is before the Senate.

Sections: Schedule 1 — proposed ss 70H–70KC; Schedule 2 — proposed ss 70L–70P, particularly ss 70M–70MB and 70NA.

Pillar 5 — privacy / personal and health information. Pillar 8 — accountability / delegated power. The purpose is largely protective, but the Bill authorises fairly broad sharing of personal and sensitive information across Defence, Veterans' Affairs and other Commonwealth bodies. Proposed s 70KC lets Ministers make information-sharing guidelines by legislative instrument. It also creates a secrecy offence around certain Defence health-quality information, with associated material exempted from FOI. Worth watching privacy, consent, who receives information and where State health laws can be displaced.

Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment Bill 2026

Federal Government bill extending and changing major counter-terrorism powers. It extends control orders, preventative detention orders, post-sentence orders and terrorism-related police stop/search/seizure powers until 7 December 2029. It also expands warrant and information-sharing arrangements. The Bill has passed the House and is before the Senate.

Sections: Schedules 1–6, particularly Criminal Code Divisions 104, 105 and 105A; Crimes Act Part IAA Division 3A; proposed ss 104.28BA, 104.28E and 105A.19B

Pillar 5 — rights and freedoms. Pillar 7 — judicial safeguards. Pillar 8 — government and security powers. This is a strong one. It continues powers that allow control orders, preventative detention and some warrantless terrorism-related searches. The Scrutiny of Bills Committee specifically raised concern about repeatedly extending extraordinary powers originally introduced as temporary measures. The Bill also expands surveillance/warrant powers and information sharing.

Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Amendment Bill 2026

Federal bill giving the AUSTRAC CEO power to restrict or prohibit banks, financial businesses and other regulated entities from using particular high-risk financial mechanisms. Crypto ATMs are specifically given as an example. It also changes terrorism-financing provisions and customer due-diligence rules. It is still before the House.

Sections: Schedule 1 — proposed ss 77–77F, particularly ss 77A–77F

Pillar 5 — individual rights / financial access. Pillar 8 — delegated regulatory power and accountability. Worth watching because proposed s 77A allows the AUSTRAC CEO, by legislative instrument, to restrict or prohibit use of financial products, services or delivery methods considered high risk. The initial framework is aimed heavily at crypto and financial crime, but the important ROAN question is the breadth of the delegated power, the criteria used and how much Parliament itself controls later restrictions.

Digital ID Repeal Bill 2024

Federal private member's bill proposing to repeal the Digital ID Act 2024 and related Digital ID legislation. It was restored to Parliament after the 2025 election and remains before the Senate.

Sections: Schedule 1 — repeal of the Digital ID Act 2024; Schedule 2 — consequential amendments

Pillar 5 — privacy, rights and individual choice. Pillar 8 — government accountability. Worth watching because the existing Digital ID system remains in operation while this Bill proposes to repeal its legislative framework. Key issues include whether Digital ID remains genuinely voluntary, privacy and data protections, private-sector participation and how the system expands over time.

Aged Care Amendment (Restoring Human Override for Aged Care Needs Assessments) Bill 2026

Federal bill aimed at ensuring aged-care assessment tools do not override the professional judgement of the person assessing someone's care needs. The assessment tool should assist the assessor, not make the final decision for them.

Sections: Aged Care Act ss 62, 76 and 79

Pillar 5 — rights and due process. Pillar 8 — accountable automated decision-making. Worth watching because it directly deals with the question of whether computerised or standardised assessment tools should be allowed to override human professional judgement in health and aged-care decisions.

Health Insurance Amendment (Incentive Payments and Other Measures) Bill 2026

Federal bill creating a new framework for health incentive payments. It includes incentives for digital health and new health technology, allows information sharing, and allows computer programs to carry out some administrative decisions.

Sections: Proposed ss 47–71, particularly ss 48, 58–66 and 129G

Pillar 5 — rights and due process. Pillar 8 — accountability and delegated power. Worth watching because important parts of the scheme can be set later by rules, and proposed s 66 allows automated administrative action. This raises questions about human review, privacy, information sharing and how much detail Parliament leaves to delegated legislation.

Secrecy Provisions Amendment (Repealing Offences) Bill 2026

Federal Government bill reforming Commonwealth secrecy laws. It repeals or removes criminal liability from more than 300 secrecy provisions, replaces an existing general secrecy offence with a new offence concerning improper use or communication of Commonwealth information, modifies several national-security secrecy offences and introduces a requirement for the Attorney-General's consent before certain prosecutions of journalists or associated media staff. It passed the House in May and remains before the Senate.

Sections: Schedule 1, item 1 — Criminal Code s 122.4 replacement; proposed s 123.6; Schedule 4, items 22–24 and 43

Pillar 5 — freedom of expression / information / rights. Pillar 8 — government transparency and accountability. There is a positive side: hundreds of secrecy offences are being repealed or stripped of criminal penalties. But the Bill simultaneously creates a new general secrecy offence and retains substantial secrecy machinery. The journalist protection is also not an absolute exemption — in relevant circumstances it requires Attorney-General consent before prosecution, and regulations can affect the scope of that requirement. Worth watching protection for whistle-blowers and sources, the breadth of the new offence, what remains criminalised, Attorney-General discretion and whether secrecy laws are genuinely narrowed enough to permit legitimate scrutiny of government.

Domestic Gas Reservation Bill 2026

Federal Government bill introduced 14 October 2026 establishing Australia's national Domestic Gas Reservation Scheme. LNG exporters would require export licences and would be required to contribute gas to Australia's domestic market. Government material says exporters may be required to contribute up to 20% of annual export volumes. The Bill passed its House stages on 29 October and remains before Parliament.

Sections: Clauses 14, 19, 27 and 45–52

Primary: Pillar 9 — sovereign resource fund / Australia's natural resources and public benefit. Secondary: Pillar 8 — Ministerial discretion / delegated power / accountability. This is almost made for ROAN's resource discussion. Clause 14 establishes the export-licence requirement. Clause 19 deals with what can count toward domestic supply. Clause 27 allows adjustment of an exporter's domestic supply obligation, while the licensing provisions give considerable significance to Ministerial decisions. Importantly, the Government says further details of the scheme — including parts of the calculation methodology — will be set later by ministerial rules and subordinate instruments. Worth watching how much of the actual resource-reservation regime Parliament decides in the Act versus how much is subsequently determined by Ministers and regulators, and whether the scheme produces a measurable Australian public benefit from Australian resources. Kristy McBain voted against several proposed amendments during consideration of the Bill; the final third reading was agreed to without a recorded division.

Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission Bill 2026

Federal Government bill that creates a new statutory framework for the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission. It formally positions the ACIC as a criminal intelligence agency, expands its intelligence-gathering framework, retains coercive examination powers, creates controlled intelligence operations, allows intelligence search warrants and provides broader information-sharing and secrecy arrangements. Although introduced in March, it returned to active House debate on 28 October 2026 and remains before the House.

Sections: Clauses 41, 58–59, 130–141, 156–179

Pillar 5 — rights / due process / individual freedoms. Pillar 7 — judicial and review safeguards. Pillar 8 — accountability and oversight of government power. This Bill contains serious coercive powers. Clause 41 allows ministerial authorisation of the use of ACIC coercive powers. Clauses 58–59 deal with compulsory examinations and summonses. Part 4 establishes controlled intelligence operations, while Part 5 enables Attorney-General-issued search warrants. Search powers can extend to electronic devices, and assistance orders can compel a person to assist ACIC access to encrypted or protected data; failure to comply can attract imprisonment. Parliamentary scrutiny bodies have already raised concerns about aspects of the Bill. Worth watching the thresholds for using these powers, Ministerial and Attorney-General discretion, compelled assistance, privacy, secrecy, judicial oversight and whether the safeguards remain proportionate to the powers granted.

Defence Legislation Amendment (Accelerating Capability and Protecting Bases) Bill 2026

Federal Government bill introduced 27 October 2026. It creates two substantial new frameworks: a Defence Capability Framework, allowing Defence capability development, testing and preparedness activities to operate through capability declarations, and a Defence Security Zone Framework, allowing permanent, temporary, mobile and emergency security zones around Defence personnel, facilities, activities and capabilities. It also gives Defence powers to detect, track, interfere with and potentially neutralise drones and other uncrewed systems. The House completed its third reading on 29 October, but the Bill remains before Parliament. A Defence Committee review is also underway.

Sections: Schedule 1, Part 1 — Defence capability framework, particularly proposed s 70G; Schedule 2, Part 1 — Defence Security Zones; Schedule 3 — oversight and accountability

Primary: Pillar 8 — accountability / exercise of government power. Secondary: Pillar 5 — rights and freedoms. Also relevant to Pillar 2 where land, State/Territory laws and affected communities intersect with Defence activities. This one deserves close attention. The framework is specifically designed to remove regulatory obstacles to Defence capability development, including situations where ordinary civilian regulatory schemes inhibit Defence activities. Security zones also create powers affecting entry, movement, searches, restricted activities and drone operations. The safeguards and oversight matter, but so does the breadth of the powers, particularly the extent to which Commonwealth Defence activity can displace State and Territory law, how broadly security zones can be declared, what is delegated rather than stated in the Act, privacy implications and how foreign Defence partners and contractors fit within the scheme

Online Safety Amendment (Digital Duty of Care) Bill 2026 — Third Reading

Federal Government legislation creating a Digital Duty of Care for online service providers. It requires providers to take reasonably practicable steps to provide a safe online environment, including protection from seriously harmful material and additional protections for children. It also introduces risk-assessment requirements, user controls over online features and stronger enforcement powers for the eSafety Commissioner. The House held its third-reading division on 28 October 2026, passing the Bill 96–38.

Sections: Schedule 2, item 8 — proposed ss 25A–27D; particularly ss 25B, 25H, 26, 26A and 27A–27D

Pillar 5 — rights and freedoms; secondary Pillar 8 — accountability and regulatory power. The Bill creates substantial new regulatory obligations and enforcement powers over online services. Worth watching the breadth of what may be classified as harmful material, the balance between online safety and freedom of expression, privacy impacts, the extent of Ministerial and eSafety delegated powers, and whether parliamentary scrutiny remains adequate where important requirements are later set by legislative instrument. Also worth tracking any Senate amendments because Kristy’s recorded vote was for the version passed by the House on 28 October 2026.

Water Legislation Amendment Bill 2026

NSW Government bill amending the Water Management Act 2000 and related water legislation. It changes water-management-plan processes, transitions certain irrigation-corporation licences and modernises the licensing framework for bore drillers, including offences and defences relating to unlicensed bore construction and licence conditions. The Bill is currently before the Legislative Council at second-reading stage.

Sections: Schedule 1 [11] — Schedule 9 proposed cl 1A; proposed ss 346–346A

Pillar 8 — accountability / parliamentary scrutiny of delegated power. Secondary FERM relevance: regional governance / water management. The NSW Legislation Review Committee identified two significant scrutiny issues. The proposed defence to unlicensed bore drilling requires the defendant to establish that an exemption applies, reversing the ordinary onus of proof. The Bill also inserts a Henry VIII provision allowing regulations to amend Schedule 9 of the Water Management Act for certain savings or transitional matters — meaning delegated legislation can alter the operation of primary legislation without going through the full parliamentary amendment process. Both are directly relevant to ROAN’s emphasis on accountable exercise of government power.

Local Government and Other Legislation Amendment (Councillor Conduct Proceedings) Bill 2026

NSW Government bill restructuring how serious councillor-conduct matters are dealt with. It transfers councillor-conduct jurisdiction from NCAT to the Land and Environment Court, creates new public-interest proceedings against councillors and former councillors, permits suspension and disciplinary orders in specified circumstances and creates related compliance and enforcement machinery. It has passed the Legislative Assembly and is currently before the Legislative Council.

Sections: Schedule 1 [9], [16] and [49]; proposed ss 733A–733J; Schedule 2 [3] and [5]

Pillar 8 — accountability / integrity. FERM link: local-government accountability and regional governance. The Bill creates stronger mechanisms for dealing with councillor misconduct, but the NSW Legislation Review Committee identified procedural-fairness concerns, additional punishment for substantially the same conduct, ministerial powers affecting proceedings and commencement by proclamation. The Bill also permits suspension of a councillor while public-interest proceedings are underway and allows disciplinary orders on the civil balance-of-probabilities standard. Worth watching whether the accountability gain is matched by adequate procedural safeguards.

Aboriginal Land Rights Amendment Bill 2026

NSW Government bill amending the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983. It creates additional pathways for Aboriginal Land Councils to deal with former claimable Crown land where native title may still exist, including dealings authorised by registered Indigenous Land Use Agreements. It also permits Aboriginal Land Councils to transfer certain vested land back to the State while preserving existing native-title rights and interests. The Bill has passed the Legislative Assembly and is currently before the Legislative Council.

Sections: Schedule 1 [4]–[6]; s 42(2)(b1)–(b3); s 42(3)–(6); proposed s 42AA

Pillar 2 — land, title, native title and custodianship. The Bill directly concerns the relationship between Aboriginal land rights, native title, Crown land and Indigenous Land Use Agreements. Worth watching the conditions under which land dealings may proceed before an approved native-title determination, the State Minister’s role in compensation issues and guidelines, and how transfers of land back to the State operate while existing native-title rights remain attached. This provides a very relevant real-world comparison with ROAN’s proposed land and custodianship architecture.

Administrative and Judicial Review Legislation Amendment Bill 2026

Federal Government bill introduced in the House on 1 July 2026. It changes Administrative Review Tribunal and migration-review procedures, including allowing authorised registrars to dismiss applications with no reasonable prospect of success, allowing some decisions and reasons to be given orally with written reasons available on request, and introducing identity-verification requirements for certain migration merit and judicial-review applications. The Bill has passed the House and is currently before the Senate.

Sections: Schedule 1 Parts 1, 10 and 12; ART Act s 285 and proposed ss 111(4)–(4A); Migration Act proposed ss 358–358C and 476AA–476AC

Pillar 7 — judicial accountability / review machinery. Secondary relevance to Pillar 5 — due process and access to justice. Worth watching the expansion of registrar powers to dismiss applications, the move from automatic written reasons to oral reasons with written reasons available only on request in some matters, and the new identity-verification regime. Failure to satisfy identity requirements can result in mandatory dismissal at the Tribunal level, and parts of the identity regime allow regulations to modify how primary legislation operates. Those are significant procedural-fairness and delegated-power issues.

Carbon Credits and Other Legislation Amendment (Integrity and Transparency) Bill 2026

Federal Government bill introduced in the House of Representatives on 20 August 2026. It reforms the Australian Carbon Credit Unit scheme and related reporting laws. Among other changes, it creates a two-stage consent process for projects on native-title or claimed-native-title land, strengthens auditing and enforcement, expands fit-and-proper-person requirements, establishes new integrity and transparency functions and allows additional greenhouse and energy information to be published. It is currently before the House and has been referred to a Senate committee, with a report due 24 November 2026.

Sections: Schedule 1 Part 1 — proposed s 28B; Schedule 1 Part 5 — proposed s 132A; proposed ss 255B–255C; Schedule 2 Part 6 — audit scheme; Schedule 3 — proposed s 23A

Pillar 8 — integrity / transparency / accountability. Secondary relevance to Pillar 2 — native title, land and custodianship. FERM link: Kristy McBain — federal Member for Eden-Monaro. The Bill materially strengthens transparency and regulatory oversight, but it also makes important decisions about native-title consent, ministerial powers and delegated rules. Worth watching how the two-stage native-title consent process operates in practice, how much detail is left to legislative rules, whether audit and publication powers genuinely improve independent scrutiny, and how the Minister’s power to make method-transition declarations is constrained.

Trade and Investment Agreements (Consultation) Bill 2026

Federal Government bill introduced in the Senate on 1 July 2026. It establishes a framework for consultation, transparency and review when Australia negotiates new free trade agreements and certain amendments to existing agreements. It requires the Government to announce negotiations, publish negotiating objectives, consult an advisory group and commission independent analysis of the expected economic and community impacts before signing. The Bill is currently before the Senate.

Sections: Clauses 13–18, particularly cls 13, 14 and 17

Pillar 1 — treaty-making / parliamentary oversight / executive power. The Bill directly overlaps ROAN’s concern about executive control of treaty-making by increasing transparency and consultation before trade agreements are signed. However, it does not appear to require Parliament itself to approve ratification. Worth watching as a real current parliamentary response to part of the Pillar 1 problem, and assessing precisely what remains between this model and ROAN’s proposal for parliamentary approval before ratification

Automated Decision-Making (Safeguards and Transparency) Bill 2026

Federal private member’s bill introduced in the House of Representatives on 7 September 2026 by independent MP Kate Chaney. It would establish mandatory safeguards and transparency requirements for automated administrative decision-making by Commonwealth departments and agencies. The Bill prohibits certain decisions from being automated, requires risk assessment and disclosure before automated systems are used, requires people affected by automated decisions to be told and given meaningful explanations, creates stronger safeguards for high-risk systems including human review and override, and establishes a public Commonwealth Automated Tools Register with oversight by the Commonwealth Ombudsman. The Bill is currently before the House of Representatives.

Sections: Clauses 18–26

Pillar 8 — transparency / accountability / integrity. Secondary relevance to Pillar 5 — rights, due process and access to review. FERM link: Kristy McBain — federal Member for Eden-Monaro. The Bill responds directly to concerns about opaque government automated decision-making and implements safeguards recommended following the Robodebt Royal Commission. Clause 18 would prohibit automation where, among other things, it would likely produce an unlawful outcome, require genuine evaluative judgement, be incapable of explanation, or have an unjustified adverse impact on human rights. Clause 26 requires a meaningful explanation to an affected person. Worth watching whether the definitions of “high risk” and “evaluative determination” are broad enough, whether the human review and override mechanisms remain effective as the Bill progresses, and whether the transparency requirements provide enough information for affected people to genuinely challenge automated government decisions.

Human Rights Bill 2026

Federal private member’s bill introduced in the House of Representatives on 25 May 2026 by Andrew Wilkie MP. It proposes a national statutory human rights framework, including a statement of protected rights and freedoms, obligations on public authorities, remedies for breaches, and expanded functions for the Australian Human Rights Commission. The Bill is currently before the House of Representatives.

Sections: Clauses 9, 11–12; Part 3; clause 30

The Bill is directly relevant to ROAN Pillar 5 because it proposes a national human rights framework, but it is statutory rather than constitutionally entrenched. Worth watching which rights are protected, how the limitation provisions operate, what remedies are actually available for breaches, and how easily a future Parliament could amend or repeal the framework. It also provides a useful real-world comparison against ROAN’s proposed entrenched charter.

Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Strengthening Communications in Natural Disasters) Bill 2026

Federal private member’s bill introduced in the House of Representatives on 25 May 2026 by Helen Haines MP. It would require the Australian Communications and Media Authority to set minimum power requirements for critical mobile-network infrastructure in areas at high risk of natural disasters or extreme weather. It would also allow the Minister to make rules requiring temporary disaster roaming so people can use another mobile network during an emergency, and would allow telecommunications services during natural disasters to qualify for public-interest telecommunications grants. The Bill is currently before the House of Representatives.

Sections: Schedule 1, Part 1 — proposed Telecommunications Act 1997 s 99A; Schedule 1, Part 2 — proposed Telecommunications (Consumer Protection and Service Standards) Act 1999 s 12RA; amendment to s 13(1)(j)

Pillar 4 — emergency powers / delegated instruments. FERM link: Kristy McBain — Minister for Emergency Management / regional disaster resilience. The Bill addresses a genuine regional emergency-management problem by requiring stronger mobile-network resilience and allowing temporary disaster roaming. Proposed s 12RA also gives the Minister power, by legislative instrument, to set important operational rules including the definition of affected areas and emergency periods, service standards, information-sharing and wholesale arrangements. Worth watching the scope and safeguards around that delegated power and how the scheme would operate in regional and disaster-prone communities

Motor Vehicles Taxation Amendment (Rural Vehicles) Bill 2026 (No 2)

NSW private member’s bill proposing a motor vehicle tax concession for eligible vehicles registered to people living in rural NSW. For an eligible vehicle weighing more than 1,550 kg, the taxable weight would be capped at 1,550 kg. The concession would apply to one eligible vehicle per registered home address. For this Bill, a rural area is NSW outside the Greater Sydney Region.

Sections: Schedule 1; proposed s 6(1)–(5) of the Motor Vehicles Taxation Act 1988

FERM / regional NSW and cost-of-living policy watch. The Bill creates an explicit distinction between Greater Sydney and rural NSW for vehicle taxation. Worth watching who qualifies, the financial impact of the concession, and whether limiting it to one vehicle per household adequately reflects the transport needs of rural households, farms and regional workers.

Local Government Amendment (Labour Hire) Bill 2026

NSW Government bill amending the Local Government Act 1993. Before a council enters into or amends certain labour-hire arrangements, the council must be satisfied that workers supplied under the contract will receive at least the remuneration they would receive if directly employed by the council. The Bill has passed the Legislative Assembly and is currently before the Legislative Council.

Sections: Schedule 1 [1]; proposed ss 354J–354L, particularly s 354K

FERM / local-government accountability and regional governance watch. The Bill introduces a “same job, same pay” requirement for labour-hire workers engaged by NSW councils. Worth watching the practical effect on regional councils, particularly staffing flexibility, procurement costs and the ability to fill temporary or specialist positions where permanent staff are difficult to recruit.

Emergency Services Legislation Amendment Bill 2026

NSW Government bill amending legislation governing Fire and Rescue NSW, the NSW Reconstruction Authority, rural fires and state emergency management. The amendments include changes to land acquisition for fire brigade purposes, Reconstruction Authority functions, reporting and review provisions, consultation requirements and protections relating to emergency workers. The Bill has passed the Legislative Assembly and is currently before the Legislative Council.

Sections: Schedule 1 [1], Fire and Rescue NSW Act s 79; Schedule 2 [4]–[5], NSW Reconstruction Authority Act ss 68(4A) and 68(6); Schedule 2 [6], proposed s 91A; Schedule 2 [10], proposed ss 93A–93B; Schedule 4 [1]–[3]

Pillar 4 — emergency powers / emergency management. Secondary relevance to Pillar 8 — accountability, particularly where ministerial consultation and oversight are concerned. Worth watching the changes to compulsory land-acquisition procedures and Reconstruction Authority powers. In particular, proposed s 68(6) provides that a Ministerial authorisation is not invalid merely because the Minister failed to undertake consultation required by proposed s 68(4A). That raises a legitimate accountability question about the practical consequence of making consultation mandatory if failure to consult does not invalidate the decision.

Electoral Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous) Bill 2026

Government bill introduced in the NSW Legislative Council on 22 October 2026. It amends the Electoral Act 2017 and Electoral Funding Act 2018. Among other changes, it regulates election posters and electoral material, changes treatment of some political donations and campaign accounts, and makes access to Administration Fund payments conditional on political parties adopting a code of conduct and making annual compliance and record-keeping declarations to the NSW Electoral Commission.

Sections: Schedule 1 [1]–[11]; Schedule 2 [1]–[10], particularly s 96(3A)–(3B) and proposed ss 96B–96D.

ROAN link: Pillars 6 and 8 — electoral structure and political integrity. The Bill ties public Administration Fund payments to party codes of conduct and annual declarations about compliance and record keeping. Proposed ss 96B–96D improve transparency, but much of the compliance information is still supplied by the parties themselves. Worth watching how independently the Electoral Commission can verify actual compliance, rather than simply whether the required code and declarations have been filed.

Lobbying of Government Officials Legislation Amendment Bill 2026

Government bill introduced in the NSW Legislative Assembly on 14 October 2026. It amends the Lobbying of Government Officials Act 2011 and Government Sector Employment Act 2013 to strengthen lobbying transparency and integrity. It extends parts of the regime to local government, gives the NSW Electoral Commission regulatory and audit functions, strengthens information-gathering and reporting powers, and adds post-employment restrictions for certain senior government executives.

Sections: Schedule 1 [2]; proposed ss 4A–4C, 19B–19C, 25–26; Schedule 2, proposed s 83C

ROAN link: Pillar 8 — Parliamentary integrity / lobbying transparency. The Bill materially strengthens lobbying regulation, but the audit power in proposed s 19B is directed at third-party lobbyists. Worth examining whether in-house corporate and industry lobbying remains outside equivalent disclosure and audit requirements. Also worth monitoring whether the proposed post-employment restriction in s 83C is strong enough to address revolving-door risks.

Crimes (Coercive Control) Amendment Bill 2026

The Legislation amends the Crimes Act 1900, the Ombudsman Act 1989 and Victims of Crime (Financial Assistance) Act 2016. An offence will be committed if a family member tries to coerce or control another family member.

Health Legislation Amendment Bill

I have used AI to make a program that will query how every politician has voted and on which bill they voted on in Queensland between 2019 and the present. Not all of 2026 is available at this time though. It is an HTML document that can used used on any browser and will be updated as information is available. I thought this may be more useful than bringing just 1 piece of legislation for Kennedy to the meeting. https://claude.ai/artifact/9nXUhkGHaaEEp2u8Tr61ui

the results in the document link directly to the legislation and and the hansard and it has a clickable glossary for all the terms used.

Justice Legislation Amendment Bill

Strengthening Victims Rights - Victim Impact Statements

Sections: 1632/2026