Skip to content
Political Tracker

11 Mar 2026 · 10:44 AM · Division 3

Migration Amendment (2026 Measures No. 1) Bill 2026

Consideration in Detail - Safeguards
Official title
Migration Amendment (2026 Measures No. 1) Bill 2026 - Consideration in Detail - Safeguards

Noes in the majority

This says only which side won the vote, because what Aye and No meant here depends on the exact question put in the chamber.

Aye
8
No
85
Not recorded voting
56

“Not recorded voting” is everyone eligible who isn't recorded as Aye or No, for example absent, paired, or presiding.

What was decided

The majority voted against amendments moved by Warringah MP Zali Steggall (Independent), which means it failed.

Ms Steggall explained that:

This legislation is so hypocritical, it gives sweeping new powers to suspend the use of valid temporary visas for entire groups of people based on changing global circumstances. I want to be really clear. The legislation does not define 'event'. This can be, in this instance, a military conflict. In future it could be a natural disaster. It could be a famine. It could be a political policy or a government inclination that the government of the day does not like. This event is not defined. So one of my first amendments is to define this event to be limited to military conflict because, we know, this can be used in so many ways. [...] These amendments make sure that we restrict what kind of event can be contemplated for this. Of course, they also ensure that this is not indefinite. In the legislation there are no guardrails. The hypocrisy of the briefing I received with my colleagues in relation to there being guardrails was staggering. There are no limitations on how many periods of six months can be instigated, which says it is an indefinite power to block people from coming on valid visas, with no thought of compensation or anything.

Amendment text

(1) Schedule 1, item 6, page 4 (after line 22), after paragraph 84B(2)(a), insert:

(aa) the event or circumstance is an armed conflict; and

(ab) Australia has not caused or contributed to, and is not causing or contributing to, the event or circumstance; and

(2) Schedule 1, item 6, page 5 (lines 26 and 27), omit subsection 84B(8).

(3) Schedule 1, item 6, page 5 (line 32) to page 6 (line 2), omit subsection 84B(10), substitute:

(10) The Minister may exercise the power in subsection (1) only once in relation to:

(a) a particular event or circumstances; or

(b) a particular class of non-citizens.

(4) Schedule 1, item 6, page 6 (lines 8 to 13), omit subsection 84B(13).

(5) Schedule 1, item 6, page 7 (after line 20), after subsection 84C(4), insert:

(4A) An arrival control determination does not apply in relation to a non-citizen at a particular time if, at that time, the non-citizen is currently in transit travelling to Australia under a temporary or visitor visa.

(6) Schedule 1, item 6, page 7 (line 21), omit "(3) and (4)", substitute "(3), (4) and (4A)".

(7) Schedule 1, item 6, page 7 (line 25), after "may", insert ", by legislative instrument,".

(8) Schedule 1, item 6, page 8 (line 9), omit "in writing", substitute "by legislative instrument"

(9) Schedule 1, item 6, page 9 (after line 28), after subsection 84E(2), insert:

(2A) If a temporary visa held by a non-citizen comes into effect again because of subsection (2):

(a) the visa is extended by a period equal to the period for which it was not in effect because of the relevant arrival control determination; and

(b) the Minister must seek advice as to what compensation should be paid to the non-citizen.

Summary written by They Vote For You contributors. Read it with the debate

Policies this vote counts towards

How They Vote For You uses this vote when scoring members against each policy.

Votes by party

Both bars use the same scale: number of members.
Aye
8
No
85
Votes by party as a table
PartyAyeNo
Australian Labor Party065
Liberal Party013
Independent70
Liberal National Party07
Australian Greens10

How each member voted

Aye · 8

No · 85

Spotted a mistake? Report a correction.