Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Omnibus No. 1) Bill 2026; Second Reading

Shoebridge stated the Greens would oppose the bill on third reading if amendments were not successful, specifically targeting schedules regarding drug offence evidentiary changes and surveillance warrant extensions. Shoebridge argued that replacing chain-of-custody witness statements with certificates undermined fair trial rights and disadvantaged defendants with limited resources. Shoebridge contended that shifting to a gross weight approach for drug quantities would disproportionately penalise low-level participants without addressing high-level criminal enterprises. Shoebridge also argued that extending surveillance warrants without stronger safeguards was unacceptable and moved an amendment to shorten the extension period.

Blyth reiterated the Coalition's support for the bill's technical amendments and the extension of cyber disruption powers, which she described as essential for combating online crime. Blyth emphasised that significant changes to the ACIC's operational capabilities required specialist parliamentary scrutiny via the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, rather than being bundled into an omnibus bill. Blyth supported moving an amendment to require a parliamentary review of the expanded extradition arrest powers within two years of commencement to assess any unintended consequences. Blyth criticised the government for delaying comprehensive electronic surveillance reform, arguing that national security laws must keep pace with evolving threats.

Hanson supported the bill but moved an amendment to restore the previous definition of 'hors de combat' in the Criminal Code, which she argued had been changed retrospectively to the detriment of veterans. Hanson claimed the government's alteration made it easier to prosecute Australian Defence Force members for actions taken in Afghanistan under the rules existing at the time. Hanson argued that changing legal rules after the fact was unfair and undermined the principle of justice for those who served in combat zones. Hanson urged senators to support the amendment to ensure veterans were judged under the legal framework that applied when they deployed.

Collins supported the bill's modernisation of criminal justice laws but stressed the need for rigorous scrutiny of omnibus legislation to prevent significant policy changes from going unnoticed. Collins reiterated the Coalition's position that changes to the ACIC's capabilities and expanded extradition arrest powers required specific amendments to ensure proper accountability and review. Collins argued that the government had failed to deliver promised electronic surveillance reforms, leaving the nation vulnerable while relying on temporary sunset clause extensions. Collins emphasised that strong national security powers must be accompanied by strong safeguards and parliamentary oversight.

O'Sullivan backed the extension of cyber disruption powers, noting their value in fighting child exploitation and serious organised crime online. O'Sullivan stated that taking away the ACIC's data disruption warrant powers was a major change requiring specialist scrutiny via the separate ACIC Bill instead of an omnibus package. O'Sullivan also requested a national childcare perpetrator register to give parents transparency, connecting this to the wider need for strong child protection measures. O'Sullivan asked the government to back the Opposition's amendments to ensure expanded extradition powers were reviewed after commencement.

Polley supported the bill as critical legislation that reinforced the responsibilities and capabilities of law enforcement agencies. Polley acknowledged the work of the Attorney-General and thanked law enforcement officers for their efforts in combating organised crime, drug trafficking, and online exploitation. Polley argued that the bill provided necessary legal clarity and procedures for agencies to operate effectively and safely. Polley commended the bill to the Senate, stating it was important for keeping Australians safe from sophisticated criminal enterprises.

Green supported the bill, noting its critical role in assisting law enforcement agencies to keep the community safe. Green acknowledged that amendments would be discussed during the committee stage and reserved further comments for later debate. Green commended the bill to the Senate for efficiency, indicating her support for the legislation's objectives.