Bill Debate · First Reading
Senate · Thursday 31 July 2025
Official Hansard for this day (APH) · Read this debate on OpenAustralia
The Senate debated the introduction of the Sex Discrimination Amendment (Restoring Biological Definitions) Bill 2025. The Liberal Party moved for the bill to be read a first time, arguing that blocking introduction at this stage would deny senators the right to debate the legislation. The Australian Greens and the Australian Labor Party opposed the motion, stating that introducing the bill would create a harmful platform for transphobia and endanger transgender youth. Pauline Hanson's One Nation supported the bill's introduction. The motion was defeated in a division.
The motion for the first reading was defeated in a division of 25 to 36.
Summary in reported speech - not a transcript. AI-generated, so check the official record before quoting.
Opened the debate
Antic moved that the bill be introduced and proceed without formalities for a first reading. Antic presented the bill to the chamber as part of the standard legislative process. The motion sought to allow the bill to enter the parliamentary record for future consideration.
Opposition response
Scarr argued that rejecting a bill at the first reading stage deviates from normal parliamentary procedure. Scarr stated that the Coalition supports allowing bills to be introduced so they can be fairly considered and debated before a substantive decision is taken. Scarr warned that blocking introduction denies senators the right to have matters debated and noted that a first reading vote should not be interpreted as a position on the legislation's substance.
McKim argued that the bill was designed to provide a platform for transphobic attacks on transgender Australians, particularly children. McKim stated that the Greens would never vote to allow such a platform to be created in the Senate. McKim asserted that trans rights are human rights and that the Greens would defend the right of trans people to exist.
Gallagher acknowledged the normal custom of allowing bills to be introduced but argued that the government had previously blocked similar legislation at this stage. Gallagher stated that proceeding with the bill would cause harm to individuals, especially young Australians, by creating a platform for debate that impacts them negatively. Gallagher insisted that trans children deserve better protection from the chamber.
Roberts characterised the opposition to the bill as an example of control driven by fear. Roberts questioned what the Greens and Labor were afraid of regarding the introduction of the legislation.