Bill
Public Interest Disclosure Amendment (Review) Bill 2022
passed, as at 2023-06-19. Attorney-General portfolio.
- Sponsor
- Not recorded
- Portfolio
- Attorney-General
Recorded stages
- introduced — 2022-11-30
- second reading — 2022-11-30
- second reading — 2023-02-14
- other — 2023-02-14
- second reading — 2023-02-15
- second reading — 2023-02-15
- committee — 2023-02-15
- other — 2023-02-15
- third reading — 2023-02-15
- introduced — 2023-03-06
- second reading — 2023-03-06
- second reading — 2023-05-10
- second reading — 2023-05-10
- committee — 2023-05-10
- committee — 2023-06-15
- third reading — 2023-06-15
- other — 2023-06-15
- passed — 2023-06-15
- royal assent — 2023-06-19
Divisions
- Public Interest Disclosure Amendment (Review) Bill 2022 - Second Reading - Whistleblowers — 2023-05-10, Senate: negative, ayes 12, noes 27
- The majority voted against an [amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2023-05-10.42.4) introduced by NSW Senator [David Shoebridge](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/nsw/david_shoebridge) (Greens), which would have amended [government amendment (2)](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?id=2023-05-10.18.1) with the words below. Senator Shoebridge explained that: > *This amendment seeks to implement recommendation 5 of the Moss review. It does a pretty simple thing. It inserts the word 'solely' into the government amendments to reflect the submissions we received in the inquiry that clarified the language to ensure that only matters that were solely in relation to personal work related conduct should be excluded from the operation of the PID [Public Interest Disclosure] scheme.* ### Amendment text > *AMENDMENT TO GOVERNMENT AMENDMENTS [SHEET ZB203]* > > *(1) Amendment (2), note to subsection 43(4A), after "because that conduct is", insert "solely".* ### Government amendment (2) text > *(2) Schedule 1, item 11, page 8 (after line 4), after subsection 43(4), insert:* > >> *(4A) To avoid doubt, if a disclosure includes information that tends to show (or that may tend to show) disclosable conduct, there might be a reasonable basis on which the disclosure could be considered to be an internal disclosure even if:* >> >>> *(a) the disclosure includes other information; and* >>> >>> *(b) the other information tends to show (or may tend to show) personal work-related conduct.* >> >> *Note: A disclosure may include information relating to a number of instances of conduct, some of which may be considered disclosable conduct, and some of which may not (for example, because that conduct is personal work-related conduct). Paragraph (4)(a) does not apply if one or more of those instances provide a reasonable basis on which the disclosure could be an internal disclosure under section 26.* — 2023-05-10, Senate: negative, ayes 13, noes 25
- Public Interest Disclosure Amendment (Review) Bill 2022 - in Committee - Meaning of public interest disclosure — 2023-06-15, Senate: negative, ayes 13, noes 21
- The majority voted in favour of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2023-06-15.27.1) to keep item 9 in schedule 2 as it is. In parliamentary jargon, they voted that item 9 "stand as printed". This means it will remain unchanged. This was to make a minor amendment to [section 26](http://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/pida2013295/s26.html) of the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2013. This vote took place after the Greens [proposed to oppose this item](https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id:legislation/billhome/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr6958_amend_e407f877-23a2-4879-bd5b-de2160704555%22;rec=0). ### What is item 9? > *9 Paragraph 26(1)(c)* > > *Omit “met:”, substitute “met.”.* — 2023-06-15, Senate: affirmative, ayes 22, noes 12
- The majority voted against [amendments (2), (3), (6) to (10) and (12) to (14)](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2023-06-15.29.1) introduced by NSW Senator [David Shoebridge](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/nsw/david_shoebridge) (Greens), which means they did not succeed. ### What does this amendment do? Senator Shoebridge [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2023-06-15.29.1): > *One of the core recommendations of the Moss review was to expand the category of people to whom whistleblowers can go to seek professional assistance, to expand it unambiguously to the legal profession and appropriate legal advice and also to empower whistleblowers to make their disclosures appropriately and with the appropriate advice to comply with the PID Act [Public Interest Disclosure Act] and any other requirements. These amendments seek to expand the category of persons to whom whistleblowers can go to for professional assistance from not just lawyers, and in some cases government approved lawyers, to Australian legal practitioners or their relevant union representative.* > > *As we know, many public servants who are members of the CPSU or another union go to their union to seek advice on how they can step through a really hard workplace issue. You can't think of a harder workplace issue in many instances than trying to work out how to do a PID Act disclosure properly. The Greens firmly believe that appropriately skilled union officials should be available to whistleblowers to help them step through the complexity of making a PID Act disclosure.* ### Amendment text > *(2) Schedule 1, page 30 (before line 21), before item 51, insert:* > >> *50B Subsection 26(1) (table item 4, column 1)* >> >>> *Omit “Legal practitioner”, substitute “Professional assistance”.* >> >> *50C Subsection 26(1) (cell at table item 4, column 2)* >> >>> *Repeal the cell, substitute:* >>> >>> *(a) An Australian legal practitioner; or* >>> >>> *(b) a union represent — 2023-06-15, Senate: negative, ayes 11, noes 23
- Public Interest Disclosure Amendment (Review) Bill 2022 - in Committee - Parliamentary staff — 2023-06-15, Senate: negative, ayes 11, noes 26
Plain-language summary
No machine-written summary in this export.
Sources
em
em supp
em
billhome
frl act