Bill Debate · Second Reading

Defence Force Discipline Amendment (RCDVS Implementation and Related Measures No. 1) Bill 2026; Second Reading

House of Representatives · Wednesday 13 May 2026

Continued from Wednesday 1 April 2026.

Official Hansard for this day (APH) · Read this debate on OpenAustralia

At a glance

The House of Representatives debated the Defence Force Discipline Amendment (RCDVS Implementation and Related Measures No. 1) Bill 2026, which implements key recommendations from the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide. The legislation aims to modernise the military justice system by enhancing victim protections, improving mental health responses, and increasing transparency in sentencing. All speakers supported the bill's principles, with the Coalition noting concerns regarding the use of tasers by military police but ultimately not opposing the legislation. The bill was passed without amendment.

Outcome

The bill was read a second time and reported to the House without amendment.

Summary in reported speech - not a transcript. AI-generated, so check the official record before quoting.

How the debate unfolded

Continued the debate

Phillip Thompson (Herbert) (Liberal National Party) LNP

Thompson stated that the Coalition would not oppose the bill, acknowledging it implements recommendations from the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide, which the former Coalition government established. Thompson highlighted reforms to suspend personnel under civilian criminal investigation, require reasons for sentencing, and remove stigmatising language such as 'malingering'. Thompson expressed concern regarding the provision allowing military police to carry tasers, noting potential risks for enlisted personnel, but affirmed support for the overall framework to improve accountability and reduce suicide rates.

Government response

Matt Keogh (Burt) (Minister for Veterans' Affairs; Minister for Defence Personnel) ALP

Keogh described the bill as a significant reform to the military discipline framework, addressing fairness, transparency, and mental health treatment. Keogh clarified that the provision for military police to carry equipment, including tasers, standardises practices across jurisdictions and includes body-worn cameras for transparency, with use restricted to self-defence. Keogh emphasised the establishment of a Defence mental health tribunal and the extinguishment of historical homosexual convictions as key steps towards healing and modernising the system.

Opposition response

Phillip Thompson (Herbert) (Shadow Minister for Defence Industry; Shadow Minister for Defence Personnel) LNP

Thompson argued that the bill addresses critical inconsistencies in the suspension of personnel under investigation for serious civilian crimes compared to minor service offences. Thompson supported the introduction of a Defence mental health tribunal and the streamlining of disciplinary procedures to reduce delays that harm morale. While expressing scepticism about the deployment of tasers by military police, he affirmed the Coalition's commitment to implementing Royal Commission recommendations to support veterans and reduce suicide.

Renee Coffey (Griffith) (Australian Labor Party) ALP support

Coffey acknowledged the impact of service on families and highlighted local support organisations in her electorate. Coffey argued that the bill improves workplace safety by allowing suspension of personnel under criminal investigation and enhances sentencing transparency. Coffey praised the removal of stigmatising language and the provision to extinguish historical homosexual convictions as steps towards dignity and fairness.
Michael McCormack (Riverina) (National Party) Nationals support

McCormack recognised the service of veterans and the work of local support hubs in the Riverina. McCormack supported the bill's implementation of Royal Commission recommendations, particularly regarding suspension powers and sentencing reasons. McCormack expressed concern about funding for the Office of the Special Investigator into war crimes, arguing it could place undue stress on veterans, but affirmed the need for ministerial accountability in transitional rule-making.
Shayne Neumann (Blair) (Australian Labor Party) ALP support

Neumann criticised the former Coalition government's handling of veterans' affairs and credited the current government with rebuilding support systems. Neumann highlighted the bill's role in modernising military justice, including protections for victims of sexual misconduct and improved mental health provisions. Neumann noted the budget's additional funding for allied health fees and the establishment of a National Veterans Data Asset as part of the broader reform agenda.
Nicolette Boele (Bradfield) (Independent) Ind support

Boele welcomed the bill as a step forward in addressing systemic failures identified by the Royal Commission. Boele shared anecdotes from constituents about the negative impact of poor leadership and opaque processes on veterans' mental health. Boele urged the government to continue implementing all recommendations to rebuild trust and ensure veterans are treated with dignity and respect.
Matt Burnell (Spence) (Australian Labor Party) ALP support

Burnell emphasised the government's commitment to implementing Royal Commission recommendations, citing budget investments in allied health and data assets. Burnell argued that the bill strengthens workplace protections, improves accountability for sexual offences, and addresses historical injustices through the extinguishment of homosexual convictions. Burnell stated that the reforms align military justice with contemporary standards of fairness and mental health care.

First speaker today

Phillip Thompson (Herbert) (Liberal National Party)

LNP

Bill

Defence Force Discipline Amendment (RCDVS Implementation and Related Measures No. 1) Bill 2026

Speeches

7 speeches, 5 other contributors

Topics

Defence & AUKUS Health & Medicare Integrity & Parliament Law & Justice Veterans

Debate Defence Force Discipline Amendment (RCDVS Implementation and Related Measures No. 1) Bill 2026; Consideration of Senate Message Bill Debate, 17 Sep 2026 · Same bill
Debate Defence Force Discipline Amendment (RCDVS Implementation and Related Measures No. 1) Bill 2026; In Committee Bill Debate, 17 Sep 2026 · Same bill
Debate Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment (Veterans' Healthcare Without Caps) Bill 2026; Second Reading Bill Debate, 17 Sep 2026 · Shared topics: Defence & AUKUS, Health & Medicare
Debate Defence Legislation Amendment (RCDVS Implementation and Related Measures No. 2) Bill 2026; Second Reading Bill Debate, 17 Sep 2026 · Shared topics: Defence & AUKUS, Integrity & Parliament
Question Time Senate Question Time 8 Sep 2026 · Shared topics: Health & Medicare, Integrity & Parliament

About House of Representatives debates

The House of Representatives debates bills, motions and matters of public importance in its main chamber. Members from all parties can take part, and the responsible minister usually replies for the government. Summaries are in reported speech, not transcripts; always check the official record before quoting.