{"id":"BILL-s1459","name":"Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence) Bill 2025","slug":"universities-accord-national-higher-education-code-to-prevent-and-respond-to-gender-based-violence-bill-2025","collection":"bill","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":446015,"registerId":"commonwealth-BILL-s1459-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-05-05","status":"royal_assent","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[],"analysis":{"summary":{"status_summary":"The Act received royal assent on 28 August 2025 and commenced on 29 August 2025.","complexity_score":5,"likely_questions":["When will the National Code be made and released to providers?","What record-keeping and reporting will providers need to do under the rules?"],"complexity_factors":["detailed code made by legislative instrument with broad content powers","layered enforcement using Regulatory Powers Act plus specific compliance notices"],"plain_english_summary":"The Act creates a national legislative instrument — a National Higher Education Code — setting mandatory standards for preventing and responding to gender‑based violence across higher education providers. It applies to students, staff and service users, on or off campus, and requires providers to keep records, report to the Secretary and comply with the Code once made.\n\nEnforcement and monitoring are led by the Secretary, with powers including notices, investigations and civil penalties (phased in from 1 Jan 2026/2027); a departmental unit will publish compliance reporting."},"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":7,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This Act implements the core objective articulated in the original policy process: a national Code setting standards for preventing and responding to gender‑based violence in higher education, together with monitoring and enforcement. The reintroduced and finalised text follows the earlier Bill’s structure and powers (ministerial Code‑making, Secretary enforcement, data and disclosure powers, civil penalties and phased commencement). While explanatory material clarified protections (e.g. disclosures and use immunity) and the Act includes staged commencement dates, those are refinements to implementation rather than a material enlargement of the Act’s substantive scope compared with the original intent."},"complexity_factors":["Delegated substantive rule‑making: the Minister makes the National Code by legislative instrument (section 15) and may make rules (section 50), placing detailed obligations outside the primary Act.","Cross‑reference to multiple other Acts: Regulatory Powers (Standard Provisions) Act 2014 (Parts 2–7 applied, sections 35–40), Privacy Act 1988 (personal information concepts, sections 27 and 42), TEQSA Act and Ombudsman Act (section 42 references).","Incorporation by reference: Code may apply or adopt external instruments or writings as in force from time to time (section 17(3)), which increases layered complexity and changing obligations.","Multiple civil penalty categories and staged commencement: civil penalty for core breach (200 penalty units, section 20) and lower penalties for records/information (60 units, sections 21–24), plus delayed application by provider type (section 46).","Extensive information powers with qualifiers: information requisition, retention, disclosure and public‑release rules with statutory protections and procedural steps (sections 27–31, 42–44).","Delegation and administrative hierarchy: Secretary may appoint authorised officers and delegate powers with seniority requirements and differing delegation pathways (sections 33, 48).","Interlocking compliance mechanisms: compliance notices (section 32), infringement notices, enforceable undertakings and injunctions (sections 37–40) all tied into the Regulatory Powers Act enforcement architecture.","Numerous defined terms and scope limits (definition section 5 and use throughout), plus territorial and Crown application nuances (sections 6–8).","Notifications, reporting and annual reporting obligations requiring detailed operational procedures (sections 18, 21, 47)."],"plain_english_summary":"**What this Act does, in plain terms**\n\n- Creates a single, national \"National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender‑based Violence\" (the National Code) that the Minister will make as a legislative instrument (section 15).  The Code can set mandatory standards and requirements for registered higher education providers (HEPs) about preventing and responding to gender‑based violence (sections 16–17).\n\n- Makes non‑compliance with requirements in the National Code a civil‑penalty breach for a HEP (section 20).  It also sets lower civil penalties for record‑keeping and information obligations (sections 21–24).\n\n- Gives the Secretary of the Department of Education powers to monitor, investigate and enforce the Act and the Code, including requiring information, issuing compliance notices, accepting enforceable undertakings, issuing infringement notices and seeking injunctions (sections 27, 31–32, 35–40).  Those regulatory powers are exercised under the Regulatory Powers (Standard Provisions) Act 2014 (see Part 6).\n\n- Allows the Secretary to collect, use, share and (in some circumstances) publish information obtained under the Act.  The Secretary may disclose personal information only if satisfied it will be appropriately protected after disclosure; other non‑personal information may be published to promote compliance (sections 42–44).\n\n- Delays the application of civil penalties and some enforcement powers until either 1 January 2026 (for Table A and B providers) or 1 January 2027 (other providers) (section 46).\n\n\nWho is affected\n\n- Registered higher education providers (HEPs) as defined in the Act are the primary regulated entities (section 5).\n- Students, staff and people who receive services from HEPs are protected by the Code's standards (section 16).\n- The Secretary and authorised officers (Department of Education staff) administer, monitor and enforce the Code (sections 27, 33).\n- TEQSA, the National Student Ombudsman and state/territory regulators are potential recipients of information disclosed for regulatory or compliance purposes (section 42).\n\n\nWhy it matters (official purpose, and what that implies practically)\n\n- Official purpose: to reduce gender‑based violence in higher education by setting national standards, monitoring compliance and enabling enforcement (section 3).  Mechanically, the Act centralises standards‑setting (by the Minister), compliance oversight (by the Secretary) and enforcement (civil penalties and regulatory tools) across the sector.\n\n- Practical implications: HEPs will need to design, document and keep evidence of governance arrangements, policies, training, support services and reporting systems consistent with the National Code (see the kinds of measures listed at section 17(2)).  Providers will face administrative and compliance costs (policy drafting, data collection, staff training, record retention), potential reputational costs from public disclosures, and legal exposure if they fail to comply (section 20).  The Secretary has broad powers to request and retain documents, including personal information where necessary to assess compliance (sections 27–29, 31, 42).\n\n\nKey mechanics and points that change behaviour\n\n- Who decides content of the rules: the Minister will write the detailed Code as delegated (section 15).  That means much of the substantive obligations will be in subordinate (delegated) legislation rather than in the Act itself (see section 15 and the rules power at section 50).\n\n- Who enforces and how: the Secretary (and authorised officers) enforce compliance using monitoring/investigation powers drawn from the Regulatory Powers Act (sections 35–37).  The Secretary can give compliance notices requiring corrective action (section 32) and is the authorised body for infringement notices and civil penalty proceedings (sections 37–38).\n\n- Information flows and publicity: the Secretary may publish non‑personal information about inspections, compliance notices, recommendations and responses (section 43).  The Secretary may also disclose protected information to TEQSA, the National Student Ombudsman and state/territory bodies for regulatory purposes (section 42).\n\n- Employment and contracting effects: the Code (when made) may require HEPs to impose obligations on employees, prospective employees and third parties (for example, student accommodation providers) — including vetting, declarations and considering past allegations in hiring or promotion (section 17(2)(c), (g), (h)).  The Code may also regulate use of non‑disclosure agreements (section 17(2)(d)).  Those items may change hiring, contracting and promotion decisions by institutions.\n\n\nCosts, incentives, and trade‑offs to note (mechanisms, not judgments)\n\n- Direct compliance costs fall on HEPs: preparing, implementing and reporting against the Code; keeping records for 7 years (section 21); and responding to information requests and compliance notices (sections 27, 32).  These are concrete cost items for university budgets or third‑party accommodation providers that contract with universities (section 17(2)(h)).\n\n- The Department bears monitoring and enforcement costs: staffing the specialist unit, conducting investigations and publishing materials (sections 26, 35, 47).  The Act authorises delegation and appointment of authorised officers, which centralises enforcement within the Department (sections 33, 48).\n\n- Compliance incentives: civil penalties (section 20) and the possibility that HEP approval under the Higher Education Support Act could be affected (note to section 20 and related consequential amendments) create strong regulatory incentives for compliance.  Public disclosure powers (sections 43–44) add reputational incentive.\n\n- Privacy and fairness trade‑offs: the Secretary can require personal information in some circumstances (section 27(4) and section 22(3)).  The Act limits use of compelled information in criminal proceedings (use immunity) but abrogates the privilege against self‑incrimination for the purposes of providing information (section 31).  The Code may require HEPs to consider allegations that have been \"investigated\" even where not proven, which raises procedural‑fairness and privacy trade‑offs when implemented (see proposed Code content described in the explanatory materials and enabled by section 17(2)(c)).\n\n- Delegation and regulatory discretion: the Minister makes the Code by legislative instrument (section 15) and the Minister may make rules about record formats and reporting (section 50).  The Code may incorporate external material by reference (section 17(3)).  That combination concentrates significant substantive rule‑making and definitional choices in delegated instruments administered by the Department.\n\n\nImplementation risks and operational considerations\n\n- Clarity and accessibility: because the Code will be in delegated legislation and it may adopt or incorporate other documents by reference (section 17(3)), there is a risk that obligations will be spread across multiple instruments and external materials.  The explanatory material commits to making incorporated documents freely available, but operationally HEPs will need clear, searchable guidance on their obligations (section 18 on notification).\n\n- Overlap with other regulators: the Act contemplates information sharing with TEQSA and state/territory bodies (section 42).  Overlap or duplication between the Department's compliance function and TEQSA's regulatory role is possible unless roles are clearly coordinated.\n\n- Data handling and consent: the Act allows collection and disclosure of personal information where necessary (sections 22(3), 42(2)).  The Secretary must be satisfied personal information will be appropriately protected before disclosure (section 42(2)); implementing robust privacy, retention and de‑identification practices will be necessary.\n\n- Behavioural substitution: HEPs may respond by outsourcing compliance functions, tightening hiring checks, or changing accommodation contracting practices (section 17(2)(h)).  Those choices shift costs and risks across suppliers, contractors and individual staff.\n\n\nConcrete statutory hooks to watch (examples of important provisions)\n\n- Minister may make the National Code: section 15.\n- Types of measures the Code may require (governance, policies, training, support, accommodation, publication and data collection): section 17(2).\n- Civil penalties for failing to comply with the Code: section 20 (civil penalty: 200 penalty units); record and information penalty amounts: section 21 (60 units) and sections 22–24 (60 units).\n- Authority to require information and retain documents, with limited immunity from use in most criminal proceedings: sections 27–31.\n- Secretary’s monitoring, investigation and enforcement powers under the Regulatory Powers Act: sections 35–40.\n- Rules power and limits (what rules may and may not do): section 50.\n- Information disclosure and publication powers, including disclosure to TEQSA and the Ombudsman: sections 42–44.\n- Delayed application of enforcement powers by provider type: section 46.\n\n\nWho pays, who decides, and how behaviour changes (summary)\n\n- Who pays: higher education providers pay the direct compliance and reporting costs; the Department pays administration and enforcement costs; students and staff may indirectly pay through institutional budget choices.\n- Who decides: the Minister decides the detailed Code (delegated instrument); the Secretary decides monitoring, information requests, compliance notices and enforcement actions; authorised officers implement fieldwork (sections 15, 27, 32, 33).\n- Behaviour changes: HEPs will be pushed to strengthen governance, record‑keeping, staff training, accommodation contracting and transparent reporting; they may also alter hiring and promotion practices where the Code requires declarations or consideration of previous allegations (section 17).\n\n\nBottom line (neutral, mechanical):\nThe Act establishes a delegated national regulatory framework that lets the Minister set detailed, binding standards (the National Code) for how higher education providers must prevent and respond to gender‑based violence, backed by monitoring and a menu of enforcement tools exercised by the Department. The immediate concrete effects are new compliance, reporting and record‑keeping obligations for providers, new data flows to the Department and stronger incentives (civil penalties and public disclosure) to align institutional policies and practices with the forthcoming Code.\n"}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/universities-accord-national-higher-education-code-to-prevent-and-respond-to-gender-based-violence-bill-2025","history":"/api/acts/universities-accord-national-higher-education-code-to-prevent-and-respond-to-gender-based-violence-bill-2025/history","analysis":"/api/acts/universities-accord-national-higher-education-code-to-prevent-and-respond-to-gender-based-violence-bill-2025/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/universities-accord-national-higher-education-code-to-prevent-and-respond-to-gender-based-violence-bill-2025/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/universities-accord-national-higher-education-code-to-prevent-and-respond-to-gender-based-violence-bill-2025/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/universities-accord-national-higher-education-code-to-prevent-and-respond-to-gender-based-violence-bill-2025/documents"}}