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

Shoebridge supported the bill as a genuine implementation of royal commission recommendations. Shoebridge highlighted provisions strengthening workplace protections during sexual misconduct investigations and ensuring perpetrators do not retain their uniform after conviction. Shoebridge noted the legislation allows military convictions to be shared with civilian criminal justice systems and removes stigmatising language such as 'malingering'.

Roberts backed the legislation but read a letter from former airman Daniel Dare detailing alleged abuse of military discipline. Dare described how the system was weaponised against him, leading to international pursuit and legal costs despite medical issues. Roberts argued the bill should be seen as a start rather than a finish, and called for greater accountability for senior officers and independent scrutiny of disciplinary powers.

Collins stated the opposition supported the bill to address systemic shortcomings and reduce suicide risk. Collins foreshadowed amendments to schedule 5 to ensure transparency and safeguards regarding the minister's power to direct the Director of Military Prosecutions. Collins expressed concern about the broadening of the definition of investigating officers to include civilians, suggesting this should be limited to sexual offences.

Blyth supported the bill while raising concerns about provisions going beyond royal commission recommendations, particularly regarding workplace protections. Blyth argued that key elements, such as access to medical records, should be in primary legislation rather than regulations to protect privacy. Blyth also criticised the government's previous attempt to cap allied health services for veterans, noting the coalition's support for removing that cap.