Bill Debate · Second Reading

Crimes Amendment (Prohibiting the Strip Searching of Children) Bill 2026, Crimes Amendment (Prohibiting Shackling During Childbirth) Bill 2026; Second Reading

Senate · Thursday 15 October 2026

Continued from Tuesday 18 August 2026.

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

At a glance

Senator Lidia Thorpe introduced two private senator's bills to ban the strip searching of children and the shackling of women during childbirth, arguing these practices violate human rights and cause severe trauma. The government and coalition opposed the bills, citing committee findings that corrective services are state responsibilities and that the legislation lacked necessary safeguards and data collection mechanisms. Crossbenchers and Greens senators supported the bills, emphasizing international obligations and the disproportionate impact on First Nations people. The debate concluded with a division where the bills were defeated.

Outcome

The bills were defeated in a division with 10 votes in favour and 24 against.

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

How the debate unfolded

Continued the debate

Lidia Thorpe (VIC) (Independent) Ind

Thorpe argued that the bills would end inhumane practices that violate international treaties such as the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Convention against Torture. Thorpe cited evidence from medical and legal organisations, as well as personal testimonies from women who experienced shackling and strip searching, to demonstrate the severe psychological and physical harm caused by these procedures. Thorpe contended that the Commonwealth has the external affairs power to legislate on these matters and urged senators to support the bills to uphold Australia's human rights commitments. Thorpe also noted that she had prepared amendments to address specific issues raised during the inquiry.

Government response

Jenny McAllister (NSW) (Australian Labor Party) [Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme] ALP

McAllister stated that the government did not support the bills because corrective services and criminal justice systems are primarily state and territory responsibilities. McAllister acknowledged the serious concerns raised about shackling and strip searching but argued that existing Commonwealth protections were sufficient and that the bills contained deficiencies. McAllister highlighted that the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee recommended engaging with states and territories to improve data collection and accountability rather than passing federal legislation. McAllister noted that health ministers had endorsed a national review of First Nations healthcare in prisons, which included recommendations to cease practices violating prisoners' rights.

Opposition response

Jane Hume (VIC) (Liberal Party) [Shadow Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations; Deputy Leader of the Opposition; Shadow Minister for Productivity and Deregulation] Liberal

Hume explained that the coalition would not support the bills due to deficiencies identified by the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee. Hume argued that the legislation created uncertainty around key definitions and lacked reporting schemes or remedies for contraventions. Hume noted that the Australian Federal Police warned that a blanket ban on strip searching children could hinder the recovery of weapons and dangerous items, compromising safety. Hume stated that the committee found existing safeguards in the Crimes Act 1914 were sufficient and recommended that the Commonwealth work with states and territories to address these issues through policy and data collection.

Fatima Payman (WA) (Australia's Voice) Australia's Voice support

Payman supported the bills, arguing that shackling during childbirth causes significant medical and psychological harm with no evidence of safety benefits. Payman cited the UN Bangkok Rules, which prohibit restraints during labour, and noted that many US states have already banned the practice. Payman urged senators to support the legislation to uphold human rights and dignity, particularly for First Nations women who are disproportionately affected by these practices.
David Shoebridge (NSW) (Australian Greens) Greens support

Shoebridge gave unambiguous support to both bills, describing strip searching of children as state-sanctioned sexual assault and shackling during childbirth as torture. Shoebridge argued that the government's reliance on state jurisdiction was an inadequate defence for allowing these practices to continue. Shoebridge highlighted that these measures disproportionately impact First Nations and poor women and called for immediate legislative action to prohibit them.
David Pocock (ACT) (Independent) Ind support

Pocock supported the bills, stating that they reflect basic values and that most Australians would be shocked by the current practices. Pocock cited data showing that First Nations children are disproportionately strip searched and highlighted rising rates of child sexual assault as a reason for prioritising child protection. Pocock criticised the government's refusal to support crossbench bills and urged a more collaborative approach to democracy.
Nick McKim (TAS) (Australian Greens) Greens support

McKim moved that the question be put, seeking to expedite the vote on the bills. This procedural motion was part of the Greens' strategy to bring the legislation to a division despite opposition from the major parties.
Penny Allman-Payne (QLD) (Australian Greens) Greens support

Allman-Payne criticised the coalition and Labor for refusing to allow the bills to go to a vote, accusing them of lacking the courage to oppose strip searching children and shackling women. Allman-Payne argued that if the major parties truly opposed these practices, they would support the legislation rather than blocking it.
Paul Scarr (QLD) (Liberal Party) Liberal oppose

Scarr stated that he would vote against the bills in line with his party's position but expressed sympathy for the issues raised. Scarr cited the UN Bangkok Rules, which prohibit restraints during childbirth, and noted that Australia had voted in favour of these international standards. Scarr indicated he would raise the matter with state attorneys-general to ensure the issue was addressed through appropriate channels.

Get updates like this by email

Votes during this debate

Division 1: Crimes Amendment (Prohibiting the Strip Searching of Children) Bill 2026, Crimes Amendment (Prohibiting Shackling During Childbirth) Bill 2026; Second Reading Not passed 10–24

First speaker today

Lidia Thorpe (VIC) (Independent)

Ind

Bills

Crimes Amendment (Prohibiting Shackling During Childbirth) Bill 2026

Crimes Amendment (Prohibiting the Strip Searching of Children) Bill 2026

Speeches

9 speeches, 6 other contributors

Topics

First Nations Women & Gender Equality

Debate Crimes Amendment (Prohibiting the Strip Searching of Children) Bill 2026; Report from Committee Bill Debate, 13 Oct 2026 · Same bill
Debate Crimes Amendment (Prohibiting Shackling During Childbirth) Bill 2026; First Reading Bill Debate, 18 Aug 2026 · Same bill
Debate Heart Health General Debate, 12 Oct 2026 · Shared topics: First Nations, Women & Gender Equality
Debate Major Sporting Events (Indicia and Images) Protection Amendment Bill 2026; Second Reading Bill Debate, 14 Sep 2026 · Shared topic: Women & Gender Equality
Question Time Senate Question Time 12 Aug 2026 · Shared topics: First Nations, Women & Gender Equality

About Senate debates

The Senate debates bills, motions, matters of public importance and the answers given in Question Time. Senators from all parties and the crossbench take part, and a minister or the minister representing them usually replies for the government. Summaries are in reported speech, not transcripts; always check the official record before quoting.