Julian Leeser
Berowra · Liberal Party · Australia
“Third, the bill gives the minister unilateral power to impose conditions on higher education providers under the new section 36-65 of the HESA, which is introduced by this bill. The current version of section 36-65 of the HESA requires that there be an agreement in place with the provider. The new version does not.”
“Presumably, if you're a university and you get a bad decision, then your only recourse is judicial review, litigation or a constitutional writ. It's not a great option when the target of your litigation will be the minister who will make the future decisions that shape your ongoing financial viability.”
“This bill changes it from capped funding to capped places, but the places cost different amounts depending on the course. The Commonwealth contribution to a history degree is $1,316; agriculture costs $32,400. Could a university which typically teaches history be allocated 100 places and decide to convert them to agriculture?”
“I said very clearly that I understand the value of international students to Australia. I also said: We will want to make changes to the settings around international students, but I want the sector to know that we want to work closely with you to develop these policies and announce them in due course.”
“This so-called system steward, ATEC, can be bypassed at any time by a minister choosing to exercise this power. Again, this means universities are, under this bill, subject to extraordinary control by this minister or any future minister.”
“He said that Australian kids should be taught Australian values, which he defined as democracy, the rule of law, basic freedoms and a fair go.”
The complete record
Every one of 784 lines we hold for Julian Leeser, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 16.
“It punishes responsible planning, and it does so without warning, without mandate and without compensation. From 1 July 2027, negative gearing on established residential properties purchased after budget night will be abolished. The 50 per cent capital gains tax discount is replaced with a minimum 30 per cent rate. The government's own Treasury modelling concedes that these changes will result in around 35,000 fewer new homes over the next decade. Independent economists forecast upward pressure on rents. That doesn't help renters. It punishes them. Michael from Arcadia withdrew superannuation and bought an investment property that houses two people. Following this budget, he says that the CGT changes will make that investment unviable. He plans to terminate the lease and sell. Two people will be evicted and need to find somewhere to live.”
“Hannah from Berowra has a testamentary trust in her will, not to minimise tax but to ensure that if both parents die her children's inheritance cannot be spent by a guardian before those children reach adulthood. Under this budget, the government takes 30 per cent before those children see a dollar. Helen from Waitara, raising a child with a significant disability, spent nearly $4,000 in legal fees this year to establish a testamentary trust to protect that child's future. These aren't tax avoiders; they're parents, and this government proposes to tax what they leave behind. The cruelty of this measure is not abstract. These are people who sat down with their solicitor, thought about what would happen to their children if they were gone and took legal steps to protect them. This budget penalises that foresight.”
“Jeff from Epping has invested a seven-figure sum in a dairy manufacturing business in regional Victoria, currently employing 32 people and expecting to employ over 100 within 12 months. He told me that the proposed changes will make him substantially worse off on any exit. Estimates suggest that there are around 642,000 discretionary trusts in Australia, and well over 300,000 will be affected. This isn't a tax on the wealthy; it's a tax on the people of Berowra. It's a tax on the tradesman who incorporated, the pharmacist who structured her practice and the couple who built something together over 30 years and hoped to pass it on. The trust tax is also a tax on families, on what parents spend a lifetime building to pass onto their children. Sixty-four per cent of survey respondents agreed it mounts to a death tax by stealth.”
“Kath from Berowra Waters put it plainly: Labor didn't run on these changes, and they've not been adequately explained. When you change taxes, taxpayers have a right to know what is happening first, and Labor hasn't done that. Alan from Galston started his business with his wife 36 years ago. He always planned to sell it and retire on the proceeds. That was the deal. It was the unspoken contract between the government and the people who take the risk of building businesses. This budget has torn up that contract. Nathan from North Epping has effectively paid himself next to nothing for the past 10 years to build his business, with a sale as the prospect of growing wealth for the future. Now that prospect comes with a tax liability he never planned for.”
“Businesses structured legally over decades on professional advice will find the rules change beneath them. There's been no transition period, no compensation and no acknowledgement from this government that the people affected by these changes did nothing wrong. They followed the law, planned carefully and took risks, and now the rules have been rewritten around them. Throughout both the 2022 and 2025 election campaigns, the Prime Minister made specific, repeated promises not to change taxes on small businesses, on farmers, on negative gearing or on capital gains, and he's broken every one of those promises. More than 100 survey respondents used words like 'broken promise', 'lied' or 'betrayed' in their written comments, unprompted, in response to a question about tax policy.”
“Their verdict was unambiguous, and I want this parliament to hear it: 68 per cent of respondents believe Labor's budget tax changes will worsen Australia's economy; 75 per cent of small business owner respondents said the budget would worsen the economy; 70 per cent said the CGT and negative gearing changes will make it harder for Australians to invest, save and build for the future; 75 per cent of small business owners oppose the trust tax; and 64 per cent of respondents agreed that trust changes amount to a death tax by stealth. Unprompted, more than 100 respondents mentioned broken promises or dishonesty, and that tells you something. From 1 July 2028, discretionary trusts will face a minimum 30 per cent tax on distributions with no grandfathering.”
“This is a bad Labor budget built on broken promises funded by a tax assault on aspiration, designed to punish the very Australians who invest, build businesses and plan for the future. Last week, I launched a survey of my electorate. So far, nearly 2,000 people responded, from every suburb and town across the electorate.”
“Parking at Epping remains a problem. Just last week I was driving around for half an hour trying to find a car park near Coles before giving up and parking on the other side of Epping. You just can't keep increasing the density of Epping while providing inadequate car parking. Local residents and people who do business in Epping are signing my petition because we need change. Epping's a great part of the electorate, but it needs more parking. You can't have that much development and not put the parking in place to meet it. It's bad for businesses. It's bad for residents. It's bad for our community. I'll keep fighting until we've got the parking Epping deserves.”
“So is she, sitting at your bedside, ensuring you're getting the best care possible. What an extraordinary story. Thank you, Dr Mani, for all you do for the women of Berowra. Over the course of my career, I've spoken about New Line Road many times, and I will not stop talking about New Line Road until it's upgraded. I'm the first parliamentarian, state or federal, to ever secure funding for the upgrade of the road. When in government, we secured $10 million for the full planning of the road. The Perrottet government put aside $70 million for the upgrade between Purchase Road and Hastings Road in the last budget, but Labor continues to dishonour that pledge. I'll keep fighting until Labor honours the commitment to my electorate to widen New Line Road so that families have more time together and less time in the traffic.”
“This alone, was life-changing and life-enabling. It allowed me a career. Dr Mani is a shining light for so many women and girls in Berowra. She's fierce when it comes to ensuring women aren't dismissed or their symptoms delegitimised—and has carried that torch loyally and steadfastly for me for the past decade. If I hadn't had her guide me through the past 10 years female health wise, our son would … not exist. Time and time again, she fought for my son's existence, and my quality of life, just as tenaciously as me. Searching for answers, consulting doctors far and wide, imparting her expert knowledge—there's nothing … Dr Mani would not do for her patients. She answers emails at all hours of the day/night/weekend. Often, she waives the cost of appointments, just because she's that empathetic. You're in hospital on a weekend?”
“Recently, one of my favourite constituents wrote to me following the birth of her first child, a son, about Dr Mani's care, and I was so impressed I wanted to put what she wrote on the public record. She wrote: Dr Mani immigrated from India and has established herself at the Hornsby Kuring-Gai Hospital and the SAN as a consultant gynaecologist and obstetrician for over 15 years. Personally, for me, this lady is the sole reason my son exists. And the sole reason I can, live a life fulfilling my potential. She first met me 10 years ago—I was 19 and kept presenting over and over again to Hornsby ER with pelvic pain. Despite many naysayers writing me off as a perfectionistic academic overachiever who must 'just be stressed' or 'anxious about grades'—she insisted on doing the surgery which diagnosed my endometriosis.”
“Founded in 2011, the dragons are a volunteer driven club that bring people together through a shared love of dragon boating in one of the most beautiful waterways in Australia. They've been successful in competitions but even more successful in building community. Fifteen years of any volunteer organisation is a genuine achievement. It doesn't happen without people who give their time and take on the unglamorous work of administration and logistics. I want to thank club president Steph Hague and all the members of the club for their service. I've been proud to advocate for the club to get better facilities, and I'll continue to do so. I want to acknowledge one of Berowra's outstanding obstetricians, Dr Meera Mani.”
“Because of our work on multiculturalism, Patrick and I became close friends. He regularly helped me on election days, through good times and hard times. His friendship meant a great deal to me. His untimely death from pancreatic cancer is a cause of great sadness to so many across our community. To Patrick's family; his wife, Patricia; and daughter, Alison: I honour a lion of the Australian Chinese community. May his memory be a blessing. Community is built through sport—through training together, the joy of competition and the friendships that develop when people commit to something bigger than themselves. I recently had the pleasure of joining the Hawkesbury River Dragons at Parsley Bay to help celebrate the club's 15th anniversary.”
“Patrick Voon was a towering figure of the Chinese Australian community. His involvement with the Chinese Australian Forum spanned two decades. He was an accountant born in Malaysia. He loved Australia and wanted the Chinese community to take its rightful place in it. When Patrick became CAF president, he took on radio broadcasters who made racist comments about Chinese Australians. He preserved the Chinese market garden in La Perouse from being redeveloped. He was particularly concerned at various times about the position of Chinese students on university campuses and the ongoing racism directed to Chinese Australians. He led a campaign to retain sections 18C and 18D of the Racial Discrimination Act, and I was at common cause with Patrick about those sections and remain convinced that we did the right thing.”
“The program supports the mental, emotional and day-to-day realities of living with cancer—the whole person, not just the diagnosis. To Jemma's family—Lang, Riley, Todd, Elise, Lynn and Brett—and the community of Glenorie: thank you for sharing Jemma with us. Thank you for turning grief into something that will help others. Jemma's bright spirit, her courage and her generosity will continue to inspire. A division having been called in the House of Representatives— Sitting suspended from 10:39 to 10:50”
“The funds raised during Jemma's campaign have been donated to Rare Cancers Australia and to the Chris O'Brien Lifehouse. Last week, at the invitation of Jemma's sister, Elise Pride, I attended the launch of the Jem, the Jemma Juckes wellness program, at the Chris O'Brien Lifehouse. It comprises the Jemma Juckes Wellness Corner, a free online space filled with wellness articles and information about complementary therapies to help people live well with cancer; a grants program to help people living with advanced cancer access support that helps them feel grounded, connected and restored; and the My Journey Wellness Journal, with help to track appointments and questions, wellness practices such as breathwork and reflection, and prompts to help find moments of steadiness while living with cancer.”
“I never met Jemma, but, like so many others, I was inspired by her story. I attended a fundraising walk, and I wrote to the minister, specifically asking him to list the drug on the PBS. I first saw at that walk the love that surrounded Jemma—neighbours, friends and strangers coming together for a woman they wanted to fight for. Jemma reached her fundraising target, and she accessed the trial. Sadly, she passed away on 18 December 2024, aged 34. Two days later, amivantamab was approved for listing on the PBS. The PBS wasn't designed for rare cancers; the approval pathways are slow, expensive and often inaccessible to small patient populations that need them most. I call on the government to accelerate its work on PBS access for rare cancer treatments. Since Jemma's passing, her family have channelled their grief into action.”
“In April 2023, a full body scan discovered stage 4 non-small-cell lung cancer with a rare genetic mutation that placed her in a small and particularly vulnerable group of patients. Jemma underwent treatment and sold the pizzeria to focus on her fight. Then she was offered a lifeline. A family friend working at Chris O'Brien Lifehouse heard about a clinical trial for a drug called amivantamab, specifically targeting Jemma's rare cancer. It was potentially a treatment that could work where others hadn't, but the price was $10,000 a session, every two weeks. It was sourced from overseas with no subsidy on the PBS. Jemma went public, sharing her story with Mamamia and appearing on A Current Affair . She raised funds through Rare Cancers Australia that paid for her treatment costs directly, and her community rallied.”
“Glenorie is a small community where people know each other, where the local pizza shop is the cornerstone of the community and where people band together in tough times. Jemma Juckes was a Glenorie original and for nine years the force behind the Glenorie Pizzeria. She was active and full of life, with dreams of travelling with her husband, Lang, and expanding their family. She developed what she thought was sciatica pain, but, when it became too severe to manage, she went back to her doctor for a scan. That scan found something on her spine— A division having been called in the House of Representatives— Sitting suspended from 10:24 to 10:36 A second scan confirmed tumours.”
“They are not wealthy by any measure. They're people who did exactly what this country asked them: work hard, save, invest, plan ahead. Now, as they approach retirement and are putting my younger sibling through medical school, these reforms threaten to fundamentally disrupt their financial plans. The reality of these reforms are that they penalise long-term investors, many of whom are ordinary families and working people. Somya's parents have tried to do the right thing, and we should back them. But this story is a reminder that Labor stands for high tax, more debt and fewer houses. We want Australians to not just work hard for their money but make their money work hard for them. Tonight, you will hear that we stand for something different than Labor's class-war budget.”
“Tonight, the Leader of the Opposition will use his budget reply to lay out a plan to restore Australia's standard of living and protect our way of life. It'll be a direct contrast to Labor's budget of broken promises, higher taxes, more debt, lower living standards and fewer homes for Australians. A number of my constituents have raised concerns about Labor's budget, including Somya from Beecroft, who has concerns about the capital gains tax changes. She wrote: What troubles me most is the impact on my parents. My parents are first-generation migrants who came to Australia with very little and built their lives entirely through hard work. They raised two children while working full-time jobs, sacrificed continuously, and slowly built a modest investment portfolio over many years as a foundation for their retirement.”
“We have long supported strong, proportionate protections for sensitive Commonwealth information. At the same time, we recognise the importance of ensuring secrecy laws are workable, proportionate and subject to proper parliamentary scrutiny. That's why the interim extension is necessary. It provides continuity, certainty and stability while the parliament completes consideration of the broader reforms. I thank the House. Debate adjourned.”
“There would be uncertainty across Commonwealth agencies about the enforceability of relevant secrecy obligations, and there would be weakened protections for information Australians rightly expect their government to safeguard. Allowing a legal vacuum to emerge, even temporarily, is not acceptable. This bill ensures those protections remain in place while parliament considers the government's broader secrecy law reforms. It does not expand, alter or restrict the existing operation of section 122.4. It does not predetermine the outcome of the larger policy debate currently before the parliament. It simply preserves the current legal position for a further six months to avoid a potentially serious gap in the law. The coalition supports this bill and will vote for its passage.”
“It's about ensuring continuity in the law while parliament properly scrutinises the government's broader reforms. The case for that continuity is straightforward. Parliament cannot properly scrutinise the government's proposed reforms if the existing framework collapses in the meantime. If this bill doesn't pass before 29 June 2026, section 122.4 will sunset automatically. The consequences would be immediate and serious. There would be a significant gap in criminal liability for breaches of a wide range of Commonwealth secrecy obligations. Sensitive information entrusted to government could be disclosed without the operation of this general criminal offence.”
“This bill represents the third occasion on which parliament has been asked to extend the operation of section 122.4. That reflects a straightforward reality: the broader Commonwealth secrecy reform process has still not concluded. The other bill in this cognate debate, the Secrecy Provisions Amendment (Repealing Offences) Bill 2026, proposes broader reforms dealing with section 122.4 and related secrecy offences, but that's separate legislation. As I've explained, a range of stakeholders have raised concerns about the proposed changes, and it's important that the coalition works through that legislation carefully and on its merits. But supporting this sunsetting bill does not predetermine the coalition's view on the broader repeal bill and reform bill. Those are separate matters, and the purpose of this bill is much narrower.”
“They include real information that Australians trust their government to protect—their health records, their tax data, their personal details and sensitive commercial information. The provision was drafted as a temporary measure to preserve criminal liability for relevant secrecy obligations while national security reforms were implemented and broader Commonwealth secrecy law reform was considered. It created a clear and enforceable criminal framework to sit alongside a wide range of existing Commonwealth secrecy obligations. Importantly, the provision was always intended to operate as an interim measure. That's why the parliament included a sunset clause. The sunset mechanism ensured that the offence would be revisited and would not be continued indefinitely without reconsideration by parliament.”
“It makes a single amendment to the Criminal Code Act 1995 by extending the sunsetting date for section 122.4 of the Criminal Code by six months, from 29 June 2026 to 29 December 2026. As I explained earlier, section 122.4 is the Commonwealth's general secrecy offence. It applies where a current or former Commonwealth officer or contractor discloses information obtained through their official role in breach of secrecy or non-disclosure obligations imposed by another Commonwealth law. Those obligations exist across a broad range of Commonwealth legislation. They protect highly sensitive information, including Australians' personal information, health records, taxation information, commercially sensitive material and law enforcement information. These are not abstract categories of information.”
“The government has a responsibility to explain these things, to identify any gaps and to say what, if anything, it intends to do about it. We will consider whether these provisions are fit for purpose, as well as other schedules in the bill, which, in the interests of time, I don't propose to run through now. The coalition will engage with the Senate committee process in good faith. We will press for answers and we will finalise our position on the bill, including on whether amendments are necessary, once we have those answers. Let me turn now to the second bill in this cognate debate, the Secrecy Provisions Amendment (Sunsetting Provision) Bill 2026. This bill is short, it's technical, and, importantly, it's necessary.”
“How will this work in practice, in the absence of statutory criteria, with no reasons requirement and no time limit but a very broad scope? The government must be upfront. It must provide a complete schedule of all 300-plus provisions being decriminalised, showing for each which civil and administrative substitute applies. It must confirm whether the relevant agencies were consulted. And there are broader concerns. What criminal sanction now applies to the ideologically motivated leaker of cabinet material—the public servant who discloses sensitive government information with no personal gain and no intent to harm? Is that person engaged in criminal activity, as was the case in Australian legal history to date, or are they now out of scope?”
“The government has turned a targeted, responsive and carefully reviewed direction into a legislative procedure that applies much, much more broadly, without explanation. Time and again, when it comes to secrecy and access to information, this is a government that cannot be trusted. There are clear questions the coalition expects the Senate committee on legal and constitutional affairs to pursue: Why did the government choose schedule 3 rather than implementing INSLM recommendation No. 13, which recommended clarifying the existing journalist defence? What specific evidence base exists for massively expanding the existing highly targeted approach in Attorney-General Porter's direction so that it covers every Commonwealth secrecy offence and locks it into legislation?”
“They argued that the reasonable-grounds standard should be replaced with a bona fide belief standard, removing the ability of courts to second guess journalistic methodology and professional judgement. Australia's Right to Know raised three specific concerns about the consent mechanism: first, it creates a chilling effect by vesting discretion in a member of the government whose own actions may be under journalistic scrutiny; second, it makes no difference to police investigations, which will proceed regardless; and, third, the Attorney-General may simply fail to grant consent, leaving journalists in indefinite legal limbo. The government seems to have ignored that submission, and it appears that Australia's Right to Know's concerns are realised in schedule 3 as drafted.”
“Their 57-page submission is a detailed, sophisticated legal document. On the consent mechanism, at page 57, Australia's Right to Know said that it was 'at best a complement to proper reforms of the type outlined in the balance of this submission' and that 'it cannot be a substitute'. What Australia's Right to Know primarily sought, in the overwhelming substance of 57 pages, was fundamental reform of the journalist protection in section 122.5(6) of the Criminal Code. They describe the existing defence as a 'dead letter in practical terms'. They argue the prosecution should bear the full evidential burden of disproving the protection, not the journalist.”
“On 21 November 2023, when releasing the AGD's Review of secrecy provisions final report , Attorney-General Dreyfus announced the government's intention to legislate the Porter direction, contradicting the opportunistic and misleading criticisms that he made at the time. This bill takes that highly targeted safeguard and expands it significantly. Under Labor, the consent requirement will apply to every Commonwealth secrecy offence that does not already require ministerial consent. That is an extraordinary reach. Neither the AGD secrecy review nor the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor review recommended schedule 3. It's the only provision in this bill without an independent expert recommendation behind it. Australia's Right to Know submitted to the AGD secrecy review on 5 May 2023.”
“That direction was signed on 19 September 2019. It came shortly after another safeguard, put in place by Peter Dutton as the responsible minister at the time, setting out expectations on the investigation of journalists. The direction by Attorney-General Porter was a deliberate and highly targeted safeguard. It was welcomed by the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security as an initial step to restore confidence in press freedom. I served on that relevant committee at the time of the inquiry. Rightly, it has never been used. No prosecution of a journalist for a secrecy offence has been brought since.”
“Schedule 3 requires the Attorney-General to give written consent before a journalist or news organisation staff member can be prosecuted for any Commonwealth secrecy offence. If the Attorney-General refuses consent, the prosecution cannot proceed. Let me begin with where this came from. In 2019, AFP raids on News Corp journalist Annika Smethurst and the ABC attracted significant public and political attention. Whether to investigate and prosecute offences was, of course, a matter determined independently by police and prosecutors. But there was clear community concern about the impact on journalism. Attorney-General Christian Porter responded to that concern at the time by directing the Commonwealth DPP to seek his written consent before prosecuting a journalist for a defined list of national security and intelligence secrecy offences.”
“Among those 300-plus provisions, the outright repeals of existing duties include, for example, the secrecy obligations of staff from the old Australian Broadcasting Tribunal, a body that ceased to exist in 2005. This is appropriate. However, the coalition notes one genuine gap in the civil substitutes: they do not apply to former officials. Once a public servant leaves government, the APS code no longer binds them. Civil litigation against a former employee is expensive and uncertain. For the most serious potential breaches, a departing official misusing sensitive information, the criminal law was the primary deterrent. The Senate committee should examine whether that gap is adequately addressed. I'll now turn to schedule 3, the provision that the coalition has significant concerns about.”
“The AGD secrecy review specifically identified this problem and recommended an additional offence covering disclosures prejudicial to the effective working of government to capture ideologically motivated leaks of cabinet material, pre-budget decisions and diplomatic cables where there's no personal gain and no intent to harm. The government declined to implement that recommendation. That was a deliberate choice. It was not an oversight. This must also be explored by the Senate committee. Schedule 2 of the bill amends existing Commonwealth secrecy offences and non-disclosure duties in other legislation. The schedule affects some 300-plus provisions that set out secrecy and non-disclosure obligations.”
“That's a significant change in scope and reach, particularly in the absence of clarity as to whether conduct is criminal in nature. Further, the change is immediate. The measures in this bill will commence on the day after royal assent, with no transition period. The government should tell Australians what information campaign or guidance material will be provided before the law takes effect. Fourth and most significant, under the old section, 122.4, motive was entirely irrelevant. A public servant who leaked cabinet deliberations because they disagreed with government policy faced criminal sanctions. Under the new offence, the same person may not be guilty at all, because the prosecution must prove an intention to obtain personal benefit or cause harm.”
“The Senate committee should examine whether a definition or a non-exhaustive list of factors is needed. Second, there's no sensitivity threshold. Unlike every other offence in part 5.6, the new offence does not require the information to meet a defined harm or sensitivity threshold. In theory, entirely innocuous information could satisfy elements if the intent and impropriety tests are met. The 'improper' test does the filtering work, but, without a definition, that is an uncertain standard. The Senate committee should examine this. Third, the new offence extends for the first time to people providing services to the Commonwealth, whether paid or unpaid. Advisory board members, pro bono industry experts and people who have no formal contract have received no secrecy training and may have no idea they're now exposed to criminal liability.”
“The bill also makes important reforms to the existing general secrecy offences, implementing INSLM recommendations to improve clarity, proportionality and rule-of-law consistency. Schedule 5 corrects three technical drafting errors. I want to turn to issues with schedule 1. The coalition supports the policy direction of schedule 1, but there are a number of specific issues we expect the Senate committee to examine. These include, first, the term 'improper'. The new offence turns on whether a reasonable person would conclude that the conduct was improper. The term is not defined anywhere in the legislation. Courts will determine its meaning on a case-by-case basis. People connected to government may not know with confidence whether their conduct crosses the criminal line. Prosecutors may face contestable standards at trial.”
“The obligation to keep information confidential survives, but breach is now a civil and administrative matter—a matter of dismissal, APS Code of Conduct action and civil remedies rather than prosecution, conviction and imprisonment. In place of the old catch-all, the bill introduces new targeted offences. Where the old section 122.4 criminalised any breach of any duty, regardless of why it occurred, the new offence requires proof of improper intent—specifically an intention to obtain a personal benefit or cause harm. Around 16 specific duties retain criminal liability where civil sanctions were assessed as insufficient, principally where personal health information, census data or commercially sensitive information is involved.”
“That review has now been completed through the 2023 AGD secrecy review and the 2024 Independent National Security Legislation Monitor review of part 5.6. The Commonwealth secrecy law operates at two levels. At the top, hundreds of specific acts contain their own criminal secrecy offences, in taxation, national security, intelligence, social services and financial regulation. This bill largely leaves those untouched. The criminal protection for genuinely sensitive national security information is unchanged. Below that sat section 122.4, the safety net. It made breach of any nondisclosure duty a crime, regardless of motive or harm. Over 300 duties relied on it for criminal liability. This bill removes criminal liability from those 300-plus duties. The duties themselves remain on the statute book.”
“We were conscious that, with the repeal of the old section 70 of the Crimes Act, hundreds of nondisclosure duties around the Commonwealth law could potentially lose their criminal consequences, so we created section 122.4 of the Criminal Code as a transitional measure, a temporary safety net deliberately built into our criminal law architecture, to hold the line while each of those duties was individually reviewed to determine whether criminal liability was actually warranted. The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, the PJCIS, recommended inserting a sunsetting clause. The coalition accepted that recommendation. Section 122.4 was never intended to be permanent. The sunsetting clause was our mechanism to ensure that the review happened.”
“The coalition will finalise its position, including on whether amendments are necessary, once that process is complete. Let me start with some history, because this bill cannot be understood without it. In 2018, the former coalition government introduced the most significant overhaul of Australia's counter-intelligence and secrecy laws since the 1970s. It repealed section 70 of the Crimes Act 1914, a century-old provision, and replaced it with a modern framework in part 5.6 of the Criminal Code. This was part of a broader and essential overhaul of our national security legislation and was enacted through the National Security Legislation Amendment (Espionage and Foreign Interference Act) 2018. This was a deliberate, measured and careful reform process.”
“I rise to speak on the Secrecy Provisions Amendment (Repealing Offences) Bill 2026 and the Secrecy Provisions Amendment (Sunsetting Provision) Bill 2026. The repealing offences bill is a bill that reshapes where the criminal law ends and where civil liability begins in the protection of Commonwealth information. The coalition will not oppose this bill in the House. The government has the numbers and it will, of course, pass this chamber. But that's not the end of the matter. The coalition has questions about the bill's scope, about its gaps and about choices the government has made that no independent reviewer recommended. These are questions that must be examined by the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee, which is due to report next month.”
“I want to particularly acknowledge the Mahamevnawa community and say how delighted I was to see the construction of the stupa and its foundation stones being laid. We hope that by the end of the year the stupa will be up and running and will make a great contribution to this wonderful site, one of the most serene places in my community. One of the things that I particularly enjoy about visiting the Mahamevnawa monastery is when they pray the loving-kindness meditation: 'May all the people in the world be free of ill will, free of jealousy.' I sometimes think that they're sentiments we could benefit from in the parliament! I know the monks know that I particularly love the loving-kindness meditation. To everyone at the Mahamevnawa monastery at Cattai: congratulations. I look forward to further developments at your site.”
“The stupa is primarily a place of veneration and merit making and reminds devotees of the Buddha's enlightenment, his teachings of the Noble Eightfold Path and the goal of nirvana. The stupa inspires laypeople to practice generosity, morality and mental cultivation in daily life. The history of the stupa goes back more than 2½ thousand years, after the passing away of the Buddha, an event known as the Parinirvana of the Buddha. His followers wanted a way to honour and remember him, and, according to Buddhist traditions, Buddhist relics such as ashes and sacred remains were divided and placed inside stupas built in different regions. These stupas became important places where Buddhists could pay respect to the Buddha and reflect on his teachings.”
“I want to acknowledge Sasanarathi Thero, who is the assistant chief monk. I want to acknowledge the architect, Kamalanie Gunatilake. I want to acknowledge the structural engineer, Damith Mohotti. I want to acknowledge the managing director of Intermarc Global, Dhammika Gunaratne. I want to acknowledge Mr Thevakumar, who's in charge of the construction services; Mr Siva Balamayuran; Mr Sunil Liyanage, the surveyor; engineer Ranji Premaratne; and project coordinator Dileepa Rathnayake. It's been a really amazing thing to see the stupa develop. A stupa is often the spiritual heart of the monastery, and it's positioned prominently and approached with great reverence. Visiting and honouring a stupa encourages reflection on Buddha's virtues, on strengthening of right views and on commitment to living according to the dharma.”
“We even had a visiting monk from Sri Lanka, Sumedha Thero, who was previously the founding monk who founded the Mahamevnawa monastery at Cattai. I want to particularly acknowledge the amazing community that has really developed around the monastery and has seen this grow over many years—in particular, Rasika De Silva, who is the trustee of the monastery and is often the guiding force in terms of organising people in the community. What's so amazing about the community is that within the community there are architects, structural engineers, construction services, surveyors and stormwater consultants—all people who've volunteered their time to build this particular monastery at Cattai. I want to mention some of their names, and I apologise if my pronunciation of the Sinhalese names is not as good as it should be.”
“On Sunday I had the privilege of being there to help lay the foundation stones for their new stupa. The monastery is quite amazing, and I've seen its development over the decade that I've been the member for Berowra, starting out with purely the prayer hall, then the dining hall, then the dedication of a Buddha statue, then the Bodhi tree relocation, where the pagoda is now under construction, and now the stupa. I want to acknowledge my good friend Reverend Soma Thero, who I regard as 'Aussie Soma' because he took his Australian citizenship a short time ago, which was a moment of great delight for me personally. He is the key spiritual leader of the Mahamevnawa Buddhist monastery. At the dedication of the stupa was his colleague Reverend Kekirawe Bodhidhamma Thero from Melbourne, who is the head of the monastery in Melbourne.”