COMMITTEES
Senator McALLISTER (New South Wales—Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme) (17:52): I present four government responses to committee reports as listed at item 15 on today's Order of Business. In accordance with the usual practice, I seek leave to have the documents incorporated into Hansard. Leave granted.
The documents read as follows— Australian Government response to the Senate Select Committee on COVID-19: Third Interim Report—Public Interest Immunity Claims SEPTEMBER 2026 Response to the recommendations Australian Government response The Government notes this recommendation. However, given the passage of time since the report was tabled in December 2021, a substantive Government response is no longer considered appropriate.
The department (then the former Department of Health and Aged Care) did, however, provide input into the Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry. ______ Australian Government Response to the Report of the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee on the Defence Force Discipline Amendment (RCDVS Implementation and Related Measures No. 1) Bill 2026 August 2026 Introduction On 14 May 2026, the Defence Force Discipline Amendment (RCDVS Implementation and Related Measures No. 1) Bill 2026 (the Bill) was referred to the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee (the Committee) for inquiry and report by 31 July 2026.
On 31 July 2026, the Committee tabled its report on the Bill. The Bill seeks to implement the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide (RCDVS) recommendations relating to sexual violence, unacceptable behaviour and military justice. The Bill introduces significant reforms to Australia's military discipline framework, including measures to modernise the treatment of mental health in the military justice system, and a range of reforms aimed at improving fairness, efficiency and accountability.
The Bill seeks to use this opportunity to go beyond the minimum measures necessary to implement the RCDVS recommendations, by implementing the broader RCDVS intent to create a streamlined, modernised and people-focused military justice system. The Report made five recommendations. In addition, the Coalition Senators and the Jacqui Lambie Network also made additional comments.
The Government's response to those recommendations and additional comments is set out below: Recommendation 1 The Committee recommends the following additional measures to address historical discrimination against LGBTIQA+ personnel and veterans: on request by an affected person, the Department of Defence should annotate any relevant Defence records to acknowledge that the action or outcome in question arose wholly or partly from conduct, status or circumstances relating to that person's sexual orientation or gender identity that would not constitute an offence under current Australia law or breach current Australian Defence Force policy; the Department of Defence should offer a Certificate of Honourable Service to personnel and veterans impacted by historical discriminatory policies; and the Australian Government should issue a formal apology acknowledging any harm experienced by LGBTIQA+ personnel and veterans as a result of historical discriminatory policies.
Response: The Government agrees with this recommendation. Administrative amendment of records will be achieved through separate amendments to subordinate Defence legislation. These amendments are intended to facilitate annotation of records and the provision of correspondence, acknowledging where a member's separation from service was connected to the application of a historical discriminatory policy.
Certificates of service are available to personnel who request them and, while they are not annotated as relating to 'honourable' service, the applicant's records will be annotated to reflect the 'no-fault' nature of their separation. This ensures compliance with the Archives Act 1983 and makes the records available to the individual. The Government agrees to issue a formal apology acknowledging any harm experienced by LGBTIQA+ personnel and veterans as a result of historical discriminatory policies.
Recommendation 2 The Committee recommends that the Australian Government continue its efforts to fully implement Recommendation 18 of the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide. Response: The Government agrees with this recommendation. The Government has prioritised implementation of the agreed recommendations of the RCDVS Final Report.
On commencement of the Bill, the proposed changes to suspension powers in Schedule 1 will enable associated instructions and policies to be updated to fully implement RCDVS Recommendation 18. The Government recognises that legislative reform is only one element of implementing the RCDVS recommendations. The Chiefs of Service Committee has committed to a dedicated program of training and policy reform to support implementation of the Bill, including training for commanders on the management of military justice matters and the application of the revised suspension framework.
Recommendation 3 The Committee recommends that Part 2 of Schedule 1 of the Bill be amended so that an offender's rank is treated as an aggravating factor only when the offender is of a higher rank than the victim as originally intended by Recommendation 20(b) of the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide. Response: The Government notes this recommendation.
Recommendation 4 The Committee recommends that the Defence and Veterans' Service Commission conduct a review into the effectiveness of the Bill within 24 months of the commencement of all schedules and table its findings in Parliament. Response: The Government agrees-in-part with this recommendation. The Defence and Veterans' Service Commission is required to conduct inquiries into the implementation of the RCDVS recommendations.
This is specified in its standing functions set out in section 10 of the Defence and Veterans' Service Commissioner Act 2026 with a relevant statutory reporting date of 2 December 2030. The Defence and Veterans' Service Commission will review the effectiveness of the relevant measures of the Bill that contribute to the implementation of RCDVS recommendations through this reporting obligation.
A report will be provided to the Minister by 2 December 2030 and tabled in Parliament thereafter, which is later than the timeframe proposed by the Committee (noting the latest implementation of all schedules of the Bill is to be 1 January 2028). Other provisions contained in the Bill may be considered as part of other inquiries undertaken by the Commission into serving and ex-serving member wellbeing at the discretion of the Commissioner.
Additional Comments from Coalition Senators Recommendation 1 The Australian Government needs to better justify to the Australian Defence Force community its deviation from the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide on suspension from duty while under investigation as included in Schedule 1, Part 1 of the Bill. Response: The Government agrees with this recommendation.
The justification is that the Bill is not only intended to implement the necessary outcomes of the RCDVS recommendations, but seeks to use this opportunity to implement the broader RCDVS intent of creating a streamlined, modernised and people-focused military justice system. The measure promotes consistency with other suspension provisions and is necessary to practically implement the RCDVS intent in Recommendation 18, noting the exact scope of offending will not be known at the time of investigation.
Limiting the measure to specified classes of offences would reduce the practical ability of commanders to utilise this tool to achieve the protective purpose of the Bill. Recommendation 2 The Defence Mental Health Tribunal (DMHT) Framework should be deferred and considered alongside the Defence Legislation Amendment (RCDVS Implementation and Related Measures No. 2) Bill 2026.
Response: The Government notes this recommendation. The proposed DMHT framework modernises the existing regime that deals with mental incapacity and unfitness, to plead before service tribunals, and thus should remain as part of this Bill, which amends the Defence Force Discipline Act 1982. The Government notes that the DMHT modernises the existing mental incapacity regime and is aligned with civilian best practice.
It is only used if a person is found unfit to plead, or not criminally responsible for their actions due, to mental impairment reaching the high threshold of incapacity. It is a measure designed to align critical community safety measures with the protective measures available in civilian jurisdictions, where a person commits serious misconduct that may put community safety at risk.
The Government notes the concerns raised by the Coalition, regarding the use of the PM008—Referral for a Mental Health/Psychological Assessment and Management Advice form, and the finding in the IGADF Inquiry into the Weaponisation of the Military Justice System Report that the use of this process has entrenched stigma, mistrust and perceptions of misuse. The Government notes that a comprehensive response to the IGADF Inquiry into the Weaponisation of the Military Justice System Report is being progressed separately.
Recommendation 3 Protect the independence of the Director of Military Prosecutions by clarifying that the Minister for Defence will not be able to direct the Director of Military Prosecutions to undertake prosecutions in relation to specific Defence Force members. Response: The Government agrees with this recommendation. The Minister for Defence will not be able to direct the Director of Military Prosecutions to undertake prosecutions in relation to a specific Defence Force member.
This reflects the operation of section 87 of the Defence Force Discipline Act 1982, which requires that the Director of Military Prosecutions form the independent belief, on reasonable grounds, that a person has committed a service offence before charging them. Recommendation 4 The Government mitigates risks associated with civilian investigating officers and confirms no corporations will be contracted to provide investigations officers.
Response: The Government partially agrees with this recommendation. The appointment of such civilian investigators is controlled by delegation from the Chief of the Defence Force. The limitations set out in the Bill require appointed civilian investigators to work alongside Australian Defence Force investigators.
Appointed civilian investigators do not have powers to charge a person with a service offence, seek a sum against a person for a service offence, request a physical search of a person under the Defence Force Discipline Act 1982, and is limited in terms of requesting photographs, fingerprints and exercise of powers by force under the Act. This measure supports better use of consultant experts by allowing them to directly collect evidence under the provision.
The Government notes that this measure supports the use of specialists, structured in a way so that they must work alongside Australian Defence Force investigators. The full suite of investigative powers (such as coercive powers) are not given to non-Australian Defence Force investigators, and this measure will result in an uplift in the Australian Defence Force investigative capability, rather than contract it out as suggested.
By formalising the manner in which consultants or external experts may participate in investigations, this measure enhances transparency by making clear the role and functions of these investigators under the Act. Additional Comments from Jacqui Lambie Network Recommendation 1 The Australian Government should amend the Bill to ensure that the key features of the Defence Mental Health Tribunal (DMHT), including the appointment, qualifications, tenure, independence, jurisdiction and core procedural safeguards applying to Tribunal members, are prescribed in the primary legislation rather than left to delegated legislation.
Response: The Government notes this recommendation. The Bill already includes procedural safeguards that limit the powers of the DMHT and sets out the minimum qualification requirements for members of the Tribunal. Specifically, procedural safeguards related to command review, time limits, limits on the types of orders available to the DMHT, and an oversight regime (through command review and petition and appeal rights) exist under the Bill.
The Government notes that the Bill allows delegated legislation to provide for the specific terms of orders, necessary to align with the treatment processes in the state or territory regime under which the affected person receives mental health treatment. The Government notes that listing specific treatment options in primary legislation also risks the regime diverging from state and territory best practices.
Recommendation 2 The Australian Government should amend the Bill to require that the categories of equipment that Defence Police may carry, handle and use are prescribed in primary legislation. Response: The Government notes this recommendation. The Bill introduces powers to authorise military police to use certain equipment, and to authorise specified persons to carry or handle the equipment (to support its use by military police), as prescribed in a legislative instrument.
This replaces the current requirement for individual state and territory agreements to be reached in respect of the suite of policing equipment used by military police, which mirrors the equipment that civilian police use to perform their functions. It will allow the carriage and use of body-worn cameras while undertaking military police functions, and streamline the authorities currently required to store, maintain and carry other equipment, such as conducted energy weapons (also known by the brand name of 'Taser').
The basis for use of such weapons will not be changed by this measure. For example, the use of conducted energy weapons will still only be lawful in circumstances of self-defence where other responses were not reasonably available. With this measure, if such a circumstance arose military police would have the benefit of a body-worn camera recording their use of the weapon.
This is an efficiency and transparency measure, which enables the use of the same equipment by military police across all jurisdictions in which they operate, with conditions and circumstances of carriage and use able to be limited through Ministerial direction. Recommendation 3 The Australian Government should provide a clear and evidence-based justification for increasing the maximum term of imprisonment that may be imposed by a restricted court martial or Defence Force Magistrate from six months to two years.
If such justification cannot be demonstrated, the proposed increase should be reconsidered. Response: The Government agrees with this recommendation. The justification for this measure is that it implements a recommendation of the Judge Advocate General to achieve better alignment with the powers of civilian magistrates.
As set out in the explanatory memorandum to the Bill, this change aligns sentencing powers of courts martial and Defence Force magistrate with those of equivalent civilian magistrates across Australia. This modernises the Defence Force Discipline Act 1982 penalty framework and ensures that superior tribunal sentencing powers reflect contemporary expectations, as recommended by the Chief Judge Advocate and the Judge Advocate General.
The increased maximum imprisonment term operates prospectively only, consistent with fundamental principles that changes to criminal or disciplinary penalties should not apply retrospectively. Recommendation 4 The government should amend the Bill to prescribe clear statutory criteria governing when a non-disclosure order may be made, including an express requirement that such orders be granted only in exceptional circumstances and only where satisfied that the interests of justice outweigh the public interest in recording and disclosing a service conviction.
Response: The Government partially agrees with this recommendation. Detailed criteria for the making of non-disclosure orders will be prescribed through subordinate legislation following the passage of the Bill. This approach will provide clarity and consistency while maintaining flexibility to address the unique circumstances of Australian Defence Force service. _____ Australian Government response to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee report: Adaptive sport programs for Australian Defence Force veterans July 2026 Introduction The Australian Government (the Government) thanks the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee (the Committee) for its report on Adaptive sport programs for Australian Defence Force veterans (the Adaptive Sports Report).
The Government extends its thanks to the individuals and organisations who took the time to engage with the inquiry and provide submissions. Comprehensive reform is ongoing Since the tabling of the Adaptive Sports Report in May 2023, the Government has commenced a substantial and long-term program of reform in response to the Final Report of the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide.
This represents the most comprehensive reform ever undertaken across the systems, culture, and processes across the Department of Defence and the Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA). To date, 32 of the Royal Commission recommendations have been implemented, with work underway on the remainder. Critically, the Australian Government has committed $78 million over 4 years from 2025-26 and $7.5 million per annum ongoing to establish a new agency dedicated to veteran and family wellbeing.
This agency commenced operations on 1 July 2026. In a nation where everyone has a place in sport, the Government encourages veterans to be actively involved in sport programs, activities, and events, either as participants, coaches, officials, or volunteers. Response to recommendations Recommendation 1 The committee recommends that the term 'veterans' sport' should be adopted to describe the spectrum of activities from adaptive sports—where modifications of equipment or rules are required to allow veterans with physical injuries to participate—to activities designed to facilitate the inclusion of veterans in community-based sporting clubs as part of transition or rehabilitation from mental health impacts of service.
Agreed-in-principle. The Government supports the use of inclusive and context-specific language to describe sport as a wellbeing tool for current ADF members and veterans. The use of the term 'veterans' sport' to broadly refer to veterans' participation in sport as a tool for health, wellbeing, rehabilitation, and transition from the ADF is consistent with this approach, as is the continued use within Defence of the term 'ADF Adaptive Sport' to describe funded sporting programs tailored for wounded, injured or ill ADF members to participate.
Recommendation 2 The committee recommends that the focus of veterans' sports should be on rehabilitation and supporting transition from service for any veteran who wishes to participate, with facilitation of teams for competitive events being an adjunct for the small number of veterans who wish to try out for selection. Government, sporting organisations and codes, and the veteran community should take an active role in supporting this focus.
Agreed. The Government acknowledges the positive impact that participation in sport can have on a person's health, wellbeing, and transition from a predominantly ADF Service-centred life to a predominantly civilian-centred life ('transition'). The Government also recognises the people, organisations, and programs in the Australian sporting ecosystem that contribute to those impacts.
While participation in elite-level and competitive international events provides value for some veterans, these events are not suitable for the needs of all veterans. The Government therefore agrees that the focus of veterans' sport should be on rehabilitation, supporting transition from service and improving access for all veterans who wish to participate. Defence currently supports access to sport and recreational activities for ADF members who are medically unfit for duty and participating in an occupational rehabilitation program.
Where eligible, support is provided through a Meaningful Engagement Program, which aims to prevent the development of secondary mental health problems associated with a lack of purposeful activity. Meaningful Engagement Activities support the implementation of the member's overall rehabilitation program. Funding is provided for both serving and transitioning members.
Defence also considers transition preparedness and personal wellbeing domains when developing individual transition plans for ADF members who are transitioning. Defence Transition Support Officers are able to assist transitioning members identify potential community-based activities, including sports, to help establish post-service social connections. Eligibility for Career Transition Training funding has been expanded to engagement activities, including sporting programs for those leaving full time service.
Eligible clients also have access to psychosocial rehabilitation activities as part of the DVA Rehabilitation Program. Depending on a client's assessed need and rehabilitation goals, those activities could include participation in sport and/or the provision of necessary sporting aids. More information on the DVA Rehabilitation Program is available on the DVA website.
Recommendation 3 The committee recommends that the criteria underpinning selection of staff for management or coaching roles in events such as the Invictus Games should require—in addition to sporting or management qualifications directly relevant to the role—a commitment and demonstrated capability to ensure veteran rehabilitation as a priority. Noted. The Government supports placing veteran wellbeing at the centre of any rehabilitative activities, including sport.
This is why when selecting individuals for management or coaching roles, Defence considers their qualifications and sporting experience, and requires that the individuals demonstrate a commitment and capability to prioritising the recovery, rehabilitation, and reintegration of wounded, injured, and ill participants. Recommendation 4 The committee recommends that the Department of Defence and the Department of Veterans' Affairs align policies to jointly support the Joint Transition Authority to facilitate veterans' sports programs that support transition from service into civilian life.
Noted. The Government notes that a range of programs and initiatives that can facilitate access to sport to support the rehabilitation and transition of ADF members and veterans are already delivered through Defence and DVA. Effective coordination is a priority when a person is separating from the ADF on medical grounds and transitioning from the Defence Rehabilitation Program to the DVA Rehabilitation Program.
If a person's rehabilitation activities include sporting activities, these are considered during the warm handover process as the person transitions between these programs. This will be further supported from 1 July 2026 by the new Veteran and Family Wellbeing Agency, which has been established to better assist with navigation to existing programs and supports for veterans.
Recommendation 5 The committee recommends that the Department of Defence and the Department of Veterans' Affairs assess the benefit of directing some existing funding for rehabilitation programs for veterans (including those still serving) to structured programs such as the Invictus Pathways Program where sport is used as a vehicle to provide physical and mental support to veterans, and making such programs more accessible to veterans across Australia.
Noted. The DVA Rehabilitation Program provides rehabilitation support to veterans who satisfy the legal requirements of the Military, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (MRCA), or historically those also outlined in the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation (Defence-related Claims) Act 1988 (DRCA). The aim of this support is to maximise the potential to restore a person who has an impairment, or an incapacity for service or work, as a result of a service-related injury or disease, to at least the same physical and psychological state, and the same social, vocational, and educational status, as they had before their injury or disease.
Rehabilitation activities (such as participation in sport) are supported through the DVA Rehabilitation Program so that any activity can be delivered as part of the fulsome consideration of a veteran's needs. Defence and DVA continuously review and assess policies and programs that provide physical and mental health supports to veteran and serving members. Recommendation 6 The committee recommends that Department of Veterans' Affairs grant guidelines should be amended to accommodate programs that are specifically targeted at veteran participation in community-based veterans' sport.
Noted. The Veteran Wellbeing Grants Program, administered by DVA, funds social inclusion and connectedness activities that promote good mental health and wellbeing among the veteran community, which may include sporting or recreational projects for veterans and their families. Organisations can apply for small grants of up to $50,000 and large grants of between $50,001 and $200,000, subject to their eligibility requirement, either as an ex-service organisation (ESO) or as a non-ESO in a consortium with at least one ESO.
From 2022 the Government, through the Veteran Wellbeing Grants Program, has provided grants of over $10.3 million to 172 organisations to undertake a variety of veteran wellbeing activities, including sport programs. More information on the Veteran Wellbeing Grants Program is available on the DVA website. DVA will continue to encourage a diverse range of grant applicants and projects to be supported, including those that support participation in sport as a tool for health, wellbeing, psychosocial rehabilitation, and transition from the ADF.
Recommendation 7 The committee recommends that the Department of Veterans' Affairs include in its resourcing advice, as per Recommendation 4 in the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide's Interim Report, to the Australian Government the necessary funding to adequately support community-based veterans sport programs. Noted. The Government invested $11.1 million over 4 years to expand and enhance the existing DVA Demand Driven Funding Model (DDFM) and to support its operations, in response to Recommendation 4 of the Interim Report of the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide.
Consistent with Recommendation 4, DVA provides advice to Government on its resourcing needs as part of the Budget and Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook processes. Where relevant, this advice includes the resourcing required for the programs and initiatives delivered by DVA that facilitate access to sport to support the rehabilitation and transition of ADF members and veterans.
Recommendation 8 The committee recommends that future Commonwealth funding for veterans' sport to organisations that are not community-based sporting clubs should include conditions regarding a minimum amount that must be "flowed through" to help sustain the delivery of programs at the community level. Noted. The Government notes the importance of the wider community in supporting and sustaining a vibrant sporting culture in Australia.
However, ongoing investments in veteran rehabilitation, including sporting activities, will continue to be guided by a focus on ensuring positive wellbeing outcomes and program effectiveness. Recommendation 9 The committee recommends the Department of Defence consider making Reserve days available to the Senior Australian Defence Force Officer in each state or region to engage local veterans—already active in veterans' sports—to facilitate increased community-based sporting clubs engagement with local ADF units and ex-service organisations as well as support with administration such as grant applications.
Noted. The Government notes that Defence maintains and resources Base Community Engagement Plans and supports the incorporation of engagement with community-based sporting clubs into these plans. Reserve days are made available, where required, to engage local reservists to facilitate this engagement.
Recommendation 10 The committee recommends that the Department of Defence and the Department of Veterans' Affairs assess the feasibility of providing a voucher system to encourage and support veterans access to veterans' sports as part of their transition, and where appropriate, gain relevant vocational qualifications. Noted. The Defence Force Transition Program provides up to $5,320 for Career Transition Training (CTT) for transitioning members who wish to take up employment within sport, in some form, or gain meaningful engagement through sport related programs.
The CTT funding aligns with the concept of a voucher system. This may include match officials, coaching, or other sport specific support services. Members seeking to leave full-time service are encouraged to apply for CTT, and to have their existing sporting credentials formally recognised or to gain relevant vocational qualifications through CTT, to enable them to engage more effectively in local community sporting programs.
Recommendation 11 The committee recommends that the Department of Defence and the Department of Veterans' Affairs work with veteran's sports stakeholders to design the package of reform that will deliver recommendations 1-10 of this report. Noted. While a reform package is not agreed, noting that the majority of recommendations have been noted, Defence and DVA will continue to support veterans' sport through the programs and initiatives detailed in this response, which are delivering important outcomes for veterans, and will continue to work closely together to support serving and former members of the ADF more broadly.
Recommendation 12 The committee recommends that the Australian Government consider a recommendation to the Governor-General to declare the 2014, 2016, and 2017 Invictus Games as nominated multi-sport events under the Regulations. Noted The Government recognises the importance, to both potential individual recipients and the broader Australian community, of honouring participants who represent their country at the Invictus Games.
The 2020 amendments to the Letters Patent and Regulations for the Australian Sports Medal (ASM) enabled appropriate medallic recognition to Australians who, at the highest level, represent their country at international multi-sport events, including the Olympics (Summer and Winter), Paralympics, Special Olympics, Commonwealth Games, Invictus Games and the International Sports Federation for Persons with Intellectual Disability (INAS) Global Games.
Australia's hosting of the 2018 Invictus Games was a key catalyst to the changes made to the ASM and the importance of this 2018 event and the Invictus Games more broadly. Until these amendments there was no specific award in the Australian Honours and Awards system for participants at eligible international sporting events to receive medallic recognition. The Government acknowledges that changes made to the ASM do not provide retrospective recognition for Invictus Games participants prior to the 2018 Invictus Games, or indeed, participants of any of the other International Sporting events now specified in the Letters Patent and Regulations.
Extending retrospectivity to one particular medal, or one particular cohort within a medal, has broader implications for the entire Australian Honours and Awards system. The system is founded on considerations of consistency, equity, and fairness. Upholding the integrity of the system as a whole is fundamental to the value Australians place on it. _____ Australian Government response to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee report: Democracy and human rights in Myanmar SEPTEMBER 2026 Introduction The Australian Government welcomes the opportunity to respond to the report of the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee ('the Committee') on its inquiry into Democracy and human rights in Myanmar.
The Government remains deeply concerned by the ongoing crisis in Myanmar. Since 1 February 2021, the people of Myanmar have endured escalating violence, widespread human rights violations and severe humanitarian suffering. This crisis, caused by the coup, continues unabated.
In 2026, an estimated 16.2 million people will require lifesaving humanitarian assistance, and over 4 million people are internally displaced due to ongoing conflict. The economy has contracted significantly, and transnational and serious organised crime has flourished, threatening regional stability. Australia has consistently condemned the regime's brutal and ongoing atrocities against the people of Myanmar, and we will continue to judge the Myanmar military by its actions.
We continue to support ASEAN's Five-Point Consensus as the framework for addressing the situation in Myanmar and urge for its full implementation. The Government is working with international partners to respond to human trafficking, people smuggling, and other transnational crime threats arising from the Myanmar crisis, including online scam operations, drug trafficking, and illicit financing.
The Government remains committed to supporting the people of Myanmar through the provision of development and humanitarian assistance, and stands ready to support genuine efforts to alleviate suffering, improve economic and social conditions, and advance a lasting resolution to the ongoing crisis. We stand with the people of Myanmar, and share their ambitions for a better future.
The Government recognises and appreciates the work of the Committee. The report is comprehensive and detailed, with 11 recommendations. The Government has carefully considered the report and: accepts Recommendation 11 in principle partially accepts Recommendations 2 and 7 does not accept Recommendation 10; and notes Recommendations 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 9.
Response to the recommendations Recommendation 1 The Committee recommends that the Australian Government: maintain its clear and principled objection to the continuing military rule of Myanmar and its rejection of the 2025-26 elections and attempts to use the 'sham' elections to build a cloak of respectability for the military regime; and actively object to any attempts to legitimise the military regime, normalise military rule and the acceptance of Myanmar into diplomatic, parliamentary and regional or multilateral forums.
Response: The Government notes this recommendation. On 1 February 2026, the fifth anniversary of the coup, the Minister for Foreign Affairs issued a statement noting that the crisis in Myanmar continued unabated and that the people of Myanmar had endured escalating violence, widespread human rights violations and severe humanitarian suffering. The statement also noted that elections were not free, fair or inclusive.
The Government has consistently maintained that a genuine path to peace requires an end to violence, the release of all those unjustly detained and inclusive dialogue between all Myanmar stakeholders. Australia condemns ongoing atrocities against the people of Myanmar and will continue to judge the Myanmar authorities by their actions. Australia's diplomatic engagement is calibrated to that which is necessary to pursue our national interests.
Australia continues to support ASEAN's Five-Point Consensus as the framework for addressing the crisis in Myanmar and urge for its full implementation. Recommendation 2 The Committee recommends that the Australian Government: more regularly state its ongoing concern about the conflict in Myanmar and continue to draw attention to the sustained repression, violence, and human rights abuses perpetrated by the military regime; recognise that continued conflict in Myanmar is now entering a new and more complex phase as it evolves from not just a humanitarian challenge to a strategic one, recognising the challenge now intersects with regional security, migration pressures and transnational crime networks; and maintain its policy of avoiding direct engagement with the military regime.
Response: The Government partially accepts this recommendation. Australia regularly raises its concerns about the conflict in Myanmar, in public statements and in bilateral and multilateral fora, including the United Nations and the UN Human Rights Council. We will continue to draw attention to the sustained repression, violence and human rights abuses.
Recent examples of our regular statements include: on 25 August 2026, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) issued and joined statements marking the ninth anniversary of attacks against Rohingyas on 6 May and 22 April 2026, DFAT issued statements via social media calling for the unconditional release of Aung San Suu Kyi and the release of all prisoners who remain unjustly detained on 1 February 2026—the fifth anniversary of the coup—the Minister for Foreign Affairs issued a statement reiterating Australia's concerns about the crisis, condemning the atrocities against the people of Myanmar, and reaffirming Australia's expectations and pathway for its peaceful resolution on 10 December 2025—Human Rights Day—DFAT issued a statement which condemned the Myanmar military regime's widespread human rights abuses and violations.
Australia recognises the interlinkages of conflict in Myanmar with regional security, migration pressures, and transnational crime networks. Consistent with the statement issued by the Minister for Foreign Affairs on 1 February 2026, the Government acknowledges that transnational and serious organised crime has flourished as a result of the crisis, threatening regional stability.
Australia's diplomatic engagement is calibrated to that which is necessary to pursue our national interests. Recommendation 3 The Committee recommends that the Australian Government work towards aligning its Myanmar-related sanctions with key allies such as the United States of America. Response: The Government notes this recommendation.
The Australian Government engages regularly with likeminded partners on sanctions, including the United States of America, however precise listing criteria and requirements vary between countries. Decisions to impose sanctions are carefully considered on a case-by-case basis. Australia keeps its sanctions towards Myanmar under regular review.
Recommendation 4 The Committee recommends that the Australian Government impose sanctions against Myanmar's Central Bank and other banks controlled by the military regime in Myanmar. Response: The Government notes this recommendation. The Australian Government has imposed sanctions on 21 individuals and 7 entities under the Myanmar sanctions framework.
These are contained in the publicly available Consolidated List, which is kept and maintained by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. On 1 February 2023, Australia imposed autonomous sanctions on those directly responsible for the military coup and ongoing repression and violence in Myanmar, targeting 16 members of the previous State Administration Council and two Myanmar military-controlled entities: Myanmar Economic Public Holdings Ltd and Myanmar Economic Corporation.
On 1 February 2024, the Government imposed further targeted sanctions, including on two regime-controlled banks that enable the purchase of arms and materiel: Myanma Foreign Trade Bank, and Myanma Investment and Commercial Bank. Australia keeps its sanctions towards Myanmar under regular review. We weigh a range of considerations when deciding to impose sanctions; they are one tool at our disposal.
The Government does not speculate on potential future sanctions measures. Recommendation 5 The Committee recommends that the Australian Government seek to disrupt and sanction the supply of jet fuel to the Myanmar junta and government. Response: The Government notes this recommendation.
On 1 February 2024, the Government imposed targeted sanctions on five entities to limit the regime's access to funds for arms and military matériel, including jet fuel. This includes three Myanmar-based companies providing jet fuel to the Myanmar military: Asia Sun Group, Asia Sun Trading Co Ltd and Cargo Link Petroleum Co Ltd. Australia keeps its sanctions on Myanmar under regular review.
We weigh a range of considerations when deciding to impose sanctions; they are one tool at our disposal. The Government does not speculate on potential sanction measures. Recommendation 6 The Committee recommends the Australian Government supplement its engagement with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations by: strengthening engagement through other regional mechanisms such as The Bali Process on People Smuggling, Trafficking in Persons and Related Transnational Crime; and exploring new additional Myanmar-specific regional initiatives with countries such as India.
Response: The Government notes this recommendation. The Government is working with international partners to respond to human trafficking, people smuggling, and other transnational crime threats arising from the Myanmar crisis, including online scam operations, drug trafficking, and illicit financing. As referenced by the Committee, the Bali Process provides a vital regional platform to build capacity, conduct research into emerging trends and coordinate responses across borders (including law enforcement agencies' approaches to detection, prevention, investigation and prosecution) to combat these crime types.
Australia co-chairs the Bali Process with Indonesia. The Bali Process' 2023 Adelaide Strategy for Cooperation identifies priority areas for cooperation, including addressing the proliferation of online scams operations. Australia also actively engages through ASEAN transnational crime mechanisms.
For example, Australia is an important dialogue partner for the Senior Officials' Meeting on Transnational Crime (SOMTC) and the Senior Officials' Meeting on Drug Matters (ASOD). These forums are focused on combatting key regional challenges, including drug trafficking, human trafficking and cybercrime (including cyber scam centres). Australia supports several ASEAN-focussed initiatives, including the ASEAN-Australia Counter Trafficking Program ($80 million, 2018-2028), the TRIANGLE labour migration program ($15m, 2025-30) and the ASEAN-Australia Political Security Partnership ($11m, 2026-31).
Complementing this, Australia also supports broader regional initiatives, including the Mekong-Australia Partnership on Transnational Crime and the Southeast Asia and Pacific Cyber Program. Recommendation 7 The Committee recommends the Australian Government: prioritise the finalisation and publication of initiatives contained in the announcement of the $370 million over three years to address the humanitarian crisis in Myanmar and support Rohingya refugees and host communities in Bangladesh, including establishing a Civil Society Pooled Fund; bring forward of the proposed mid-cycle review of the Australia-Myanmar Development Partnership Plan 2024-2029 to reflect the rapidly increasing humanitarian needs arising in Myanmar and border communities in Thailand, India and Bangladesh; prioritise the development of the publication of clear operational principles to guide non-avoidable engagement between development partners and entities associated with the military regime; demonstrate how the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade due diligence framework is working to facilitate greater access, flexibility and use of locally led organisations in the delivery of Australia's humanitarian program in Myanmar.
Response: The Government partially accepts this recommendation. DFAT is in the process of finalising a range of agreements under the new $370 million humanitarian package for the people of Myanmar, including displaced Rohingyas and host communities in Bangladesh. Noting the sensitivities and security situation, the Government does not publicise the details of our initiatives in Myanmar or our local implementing partners for their safety.
This is at their request. The Australia-Myanmar Development Partnership Plan and our development programs are subject to ongoing oversight and monitoring to ensure they are appropriate and responsive to immediate changes and shifts in the Myanmar development context. This process is complemented by a mid-cycle review of the Australia-Myanmar Development Partnership Plan 2024-2029 which will be undertaken in the 2026-27 financial year.
The review process will take into consideration longer-term contextual shifts to ensure that our development and humanitarian priorities for Myanmar remain relevant. Australia's development and humanitarian partners have rigorous processes in place to ensure that funding is delivered appropriately and to intended beneficiaries. This is a fundamental condition of Australia's engagement with them.
We take proactive steps to ensure our assistance to Myanmar neither goes to the authorities nor lends them credibility. Noting the sensitivities and security situation in Myanmar, it would not be appropriate to publicise operational details of these processes. DFAT's due diligence framework establishes important minimum requirements for any implementing partner delivering development cooperation or humanitarian assistance.
This framework is one element of the Government's risk management approach to the delivery of official development assistance in the high-risk context of Myanmar. Locally-led assistance, including work with civil society organisations, remains at the heart of Australia's development assistance program in Myanmar. Australia's humanitarian assistance is delivered through United Nations partners, the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, and international non-government organisations (INGO).
Our implementing partners in Myanmar provide support to many local organisations—in some sectors they are the only entities that can deliver programming, particularly in remote and conflict-affected areas. We prioritise programs that give funding to local downstream partners and support funding for local organisations, including women's groups and organisations for people with disability.
While in many cases direct funding is not possible to, or desired by, civil society organisations, most of our programs provide subgrants which include capacity development components and/or funding for local organisations. We will continue to track our support to local organisations through our United Nations and INGO partners, including via funding to subgrantees, depending on local sensitivities.
Recommendation 8 The Committee reiterates the recommendations made in the Committee's report into the Efficacy of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade due diligence framework. In particular, recommendation 1 of that report which urges greater flexibility in Australia's delivery of aid, recognising that locally led organisations can often better deliver aid in conflict situations.
Response: The Government notes this recommendation. The Government recognises the key role that locally-led organisations can play in delivering humanitarian and development assistance. Strengthening localisation is a key commitment of Australia's International Development Policy and this is built into the Australia-Myanmar Development Partnership Plan 2024-2029.
While Australia's direct funding partners in Myanmar are mostly multilateral agencies and international non-government organisations, they partner with local organisations to deliver assistance. The Government considers the existing due diligence framework used by DFAT to be fit-for-purpose. This framework is one element of the Government's risk management approach to the delivery of official development assistance in the high-risk context of Myanmar.
Recommendation 9 The Committee recommends the Australian Government increase resettlement opportunities and alternative visas for education, research and employment opportunities for Myanmar asylum seekers and refugees and expand the Myanmar Australia Awards program. Response: The Australian Government notes the recommendation. In recognition of the grave humanitarian and security situation in Myanmar, the Australian Government has designated Myanmar nationals in Australia as a priority caseload in our onshore humanitarian visa program.
This focus sits alongside Australia's ongoing offshore humanitarian resettlement efforts, where Myanmar nationals continue to feature prominently. From 2019-20 to 2024-25, Myanmar has consistently been in: the top five countries of origin for offshore humanitarian visas granted; the top ten countries of origin for vulnerable women and children granted offshore humanitarian visas; and the top five countries of origin for the Community Support Program (CSP) and its predecessor, the Community Proposal Pilot (CPP).
From 1 July 2025 to 31 March 2026, 1,364 permanent offshore humanitarian visas were granted to Myanmar citizens, making up almost 10% of offshore humanitarian grants in the 2025-26 program year. The Australia Awards program in Myanmar is a valued component of our development program, supporting emerging and future leaders to develop skills and knowledge to drive change and contribute to development in Myanmar while maintaining strong links to Australia.
Recommendation 10 The Committee recommends that the Australian Government provide a quarterly statement to Parliament on its response to the ongoing conflict in Myanmar and include: progress on the implementation of the Australia-Myanmar Development Partnership Plan 2024-2029; progress of initiatives undertaken with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations; the monitoring and compliance of Australia's sanctions regime; and engagement with the Myanmar diaspora and National Unity Government.
Response: The Government does not accept this recommendation. There are a range of existing mechanisms and avenues in place to provide transparency of the Government's response to the ongoing conflict in Myanmar. Progress of all DFAT initiatives, including our bilateral development program, ASEAN and other regional programs on and related to Myanmar, are aggregated and reported on through the DFAT Annual Report, Annual Performance of Australia Development Cooperation Report and DFAT's Online AusDev Portal.
This includes progress of regional initiatives including the ASEAN-Australia Counter Trafficking Program, the Mekong-Australia Partnership on Transnational Crime and the Southeast Asia and Pacific Cyber Program. As is the case for all Development Partnership Plans (DPP), DFAT undertakes an internal performance assessment process of DPP implementation each year.
A mid-cycle review of the DPP is scheduled for 2026-27. The review process will take into consideration key shifts in the Myanmar development context since 2024 to ensure our development and humanitarian priorities for Myanmar remain relevant. To ensure the safety and security of our implementing partners, we do not share information about our programs, implementing partners or implementation progress.
As Australia's sanctions regulator, the Australian Sanctions Office conducts robust, independent evaluations of potential non-compliance and takes appropriate corrective action where a risk of a contravention is found. It is the longstanding practice of successive Australian governments not to comment on sanctions compliance matters. Australian officials engage with a diversity of voices and groups as opportunities arise, including National Unity Government representatives.
The Government also engages with diaspora at both organisational and individual levels. We refrain from publicising this engagement due to the risks posed to these groups, the diaspora and their families still in Myanmar. Recommendation 11 The Committee recommends the Australian Government formalise its engagement with Myanmar diaspora groups to access the extensive first-hand knowledge, experience and networks these groups can bring to sustaining Australia's response to the ongoing conflict in Myanmar.
Response: The Government accepts this recommendation in principle. The Australian Government acknowledges the importance of consultation and engagement with a broad range of views and perspectives. Australian officials engage with a diversity of voices and groups as opportunities arise, including members of the Myanmar diaspora.
However, public formalised engagement with diaspora carries sensitivities due to the risks posed to them and their families still in Myanmar. Australia stands with the people of Myanmar and we will continue to engage with groups and voices working for democracy.