Question Time AU

Bill Debate · Consideration in Detail

Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Amendment Bill 2026; Consideration in Detail

House of Representatives · Wednesday 19 August 2026

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

At a glance

The debate centred on an amendment moved by the Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs to close a perceived gap in national security oversight. The amendment sought to bring significant researcher-to-researcher collaborations involving foreign entities under the Foreign Arrangements Scheme, even if the university itself was not a party to the agreement. The Assistant Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade opposed the amendment, citing existing espionage laws and the findings of the Huxtable review, which concluded the current framework balanced oversight with reduced regulatory burden. The Shadow Minister argued that reliance on media exposure rather than government assessment indicated a failure in the current regime. The question on the amendment remained unresolved at the end of the recorded debate.

Outcome

The question on the amendment was unresolved.

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

How the debate unfolded

Opened the debate

O'Brien moved an amendment to insert Part 16A into the bill, defining and regulating significant researcher-to-researcher arrangements. The member argued that a gap existed in the current legislation where collaborations between individual university researchers and foreign entities escaped statutory oversight if the university was not formally a party to the deal. O'Brien contended that this loophole allowed potentially risky engagements to proceed without assessment by Commonwealth agencies, relying instead on informal ministerial letters. The member urged the government to adopt the amendment to ensure a comprehensive 'Team Australia' approach to national security and to prevent foreign interference in academic research.

Government response

Thistlethwaite stated that existing foreign interference and espionage laws already captured researchers who passed sensitive information to foreign powers. The minister noted that the Shadow Minister had previously acknowledged that the Foreign Arrangements Scheme was not the sole protection against such risks. Thistlethwaite referenced the Huxtable review, which did not recommend the Coalition's approach, arguing that the government's amendments struck the appropriate balance between oversight and reducing regulatory burden for lower-risk activities. Consequently, the minister confirmed the government would not support the amendment.