Question Time AU

Bill Debate · Second Reading

Sex Discrimination Amendment (Sex-based Rights) Bill 2026; Second Reading

House of Representatives · Monday 25 May 2026

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

At a glance

Alison Penfold moved the second reading of the bill, arguing that current laws fail to protect women's sex-based rights due to ambiguity introduced in 2013. She contended that the legislation restores clarity by defining sex as binary and protecting women-only spaces, while maintaining protections against unfair discrimination for transgender Australians. Penfold cited the Federal Court ruling in Giggle v Tickle as evidence of legal confusion and called for either government support for the bill or the establishment of a joint select committee. The debate consisted of a single speech, with no other members contributing to the record provided.

Outcome

The transcript provided contains only the opening speech by Alison Penfold and does not record the final outcome or vote on the bill.

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

How the debate unfolded

Opened the debate

Penfold argued that the Sex Discrimination Act had become ambiguous following 2013 amendments that inserted gender identity protections without clarifying conflicts with sex-based rights. Penfold stated that the bill restores legal certainty by reinstating binary definitions of man and woman and explicitly protecting women-only spaces, services, and activities. Penfold maintained that the legislation grounds law in biological reality, which she described as essential for privacy, safety, and fairness in areas such as sport and health. Penfold asserted that the bill does not attack transgender Australians but ensures discrimination protections are practically workable and legally clear. Penfold urged the Prime Minister to support the bill or establish a joint select committee to review the operation of the Sex Discrimination Act.