Statute Update Bill 2026
Ms McKENZIE (Flinders) (09:47): I rise to speak on the Statute Update Bill 2026. The coalition recognises the important role that the statute update legislation plays in maintaining the quality and integrity of the Commonwealth Statute Book. These bills have long been a feature of good legislative practice.
They correct drafting errors, update terminology and cross-references, repeal spent provisions and improve consistency across Commonwealth legislation. Keeping the law accurate, coherent and accessible benefits everyone from the courts and legal practitioners to government agencies and ordinary Australians seeking to understand their legal rights and obligations.
On its face, this bill is consistent with that longstanding purpose. Schedule 1 contains a large number of technical amendments across Commonwealth legislation, while schedule 2 repeals more than 100 obsolete amending acts that no longer have any operative effect. The overwhelming majority of the amendments appear to be precisely the kind of technical machinery changes that statute update bills are intended to contain.
They correct drafting errors, modernise language update references and remove spent legislative provisions. The coalition supports the principle that the Commonwealth Statute Book should be kept accurate and up to date. However, we also believe parliament has an obligation to verify, not simply assume, that legislation described as technical is in fact technical.
Unfortunately, this government's legislative record gives parliament good reason to exercise that scrutiny. Too often we have seen legislation introduced in haste, legislation requiring significant correction after introduction or legislation producing unintended consequences because proper scrutiny was lacking. Australians expect better.
For that reason, the coalition will be seeking referral of this bill to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee. That is not because we oppose this bill; rather, it is because parliament should take the opportunity to test the government's assertion that every amendment is genuinely technical and that no substantive legal rights, obligations or entitlements are affected.
A small number of amendments extend beyond straightforward editorial corrections. They include amendments affecting the Criminal Code, veterans legislation, radio communications, the Midwife Professional Indemnity Scheme, marine safety legislation, family law, freedom of information and electoral legislation. Those amendments may well be entirely mechanical in nature, and, if they are, the government should have no difficulty explaining them to the committee and placing that explanation on the public record.
In particular, we would expect confirmation that the amendments affecting veterans legislation have no impact whatsoever on veterans entitlements, that the relocation of existing statutory powers does not alter their legal operation and that the repeal of transitional provisions has no continuing legal consequences. That is exactly the purpose of the committee process.
It strengthens parliamentary scrutiny, it improves transparency and it provides confidence that the legislation described as technical does not, inadvertently or otherwise, produce substantive legal change. Good lawmaking is not just about good drafting; it is about careful scrutiny. It is about ensuring parliament understands precisely what it is being asked to pass.
Accordingly, while the coalition supports the objectives of maintaining an accurate and coherent statute book, we believe this bill should first be examined by the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee before proceeding through the Senate. Debate adjourned.