Submissions

The views and opinions expressed in the submissions belong to their authors and do not reflect those of the Australian Law Reform Commission. For more information, see our submissions policy.

This page lists all submissions received during the Inquiry. Submissions 1 to 50 were received before publication of the Discussion Paper in May 2025. All later submissions were received after publication of the Discussion Paper.

1. T Sampson

3. Confidential

4. Confidential

5. E Wensing

6. Minerals Council of Australia

7. M Lucas

8. G Johns and W O’Chee

9. Confidential

10. P&E Law

11. Mawal Pty Ltd

12. R Lapthorne

13. Confidential

14. First Nations Heritage Protection Alliance

15. A English

13. F Powell

17. MPS Law

18. Environmental Justice Australia

19. Environmental Equity

20. National Native Title Council

22. Committee on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Water Interests

23. National Native Title Tribunal

24. Local Government Association of Queensland

25. Robe River Kuruma Aboriginal Corporation

26. Kimberley Land Council

27. Confidential

28. Confidential

29. Confidential

30. First Nations Clean Energy Network

31. Central Land Council

32. Association of Mining and Exploration Companies

33. Confidential

34. Confidential

35. Dambimangari Aboriginal Corporation

36. Australian Local Government Association

37. Kyburra Munda Yalga Aboriginal Corporation

38. PKKP Aboriginal Corporation

39. Department of Agriculture, Fisheries, and Forestry (Cth)

40. Confidential

41. National Farmers’ Federation

42. First Nations Legal and Research Services

43. State of Queensland

44. Cape York Regional Organisations

45. Queensland South Native Title Services

46. Not published

47. Law Council of Australia

48. Australian Human Rights Commission

49. Confidential

51. W Santo

52. Confidential

53. Bardi Jawi Niimidiman Aboriginal Corporation RNTBC

55. Confidential

56. J Armstrong

57. M Lucas

58. Confidential

59. K and S Broad

60. Confidential

61. Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (Cth)

62. Maddocks

63. Confidential

64. Amalgamated Prospectors and Leaseholders Association of WA Inc

66. Queensland Farmers’ Federation

67. Pastoral Land Board

68. Indigenous Land and Sea Corporation

69. Indigenous On Country Services

70. Isaac Regional Council

71. Gympie Regional Council

72. Lowitja Institute

73. Confidential

74. Confidential

75. Confidential

76. M Boge

77. Jigsaw Legal

78. Productivity Commission

79. Eastern Goldfields Prospectors Association

80. ANTAR

81. Martuwarra Fitzroy River Council

82. State Aboriginal Heritage Committee (SA)

83. Confidential

84. Kimberley Pilbara Cattlemen’s Association

85. Confidential

86. National Native Title Tribunal

87. Confidential

88. Confidential

89. Confidential

91. Not published

92. Confidential

93. J Marrell

94. K O’Bryan

95. Houston Legal & Consultants

96. North Queensland Land Council

97. Association of Mining and Exploration Companies

98. Gawler Ranges Aboriginal Corporation RNTBC

99. L O’Neill

101. New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council

102. Norman Waterhouse Lawyers

103. Confidential

104. South Australian Native Title Services

105. Queensland Small Miners Council

106. Northern Territory Cattlemen’s Association

107. Confidential

108. Local Government Association of Queensland

109. Confidential

110. Federation of Victorian Traditional Owner Corporations

111. AgForce Queensland Farmers Ltd

112. Confidential

113. Minerals Council of Australia

114. National Farmers’ Federation

115. Western Australian Government

116. Confidential

117. NSW Minerals Council

118. Australian Human Rights Commission

119. I Ingram

120. Law Council of Australia

121. Central Land Council

122. Confidential

123. Bureau of Meteorology

124. Queensland South Native Title Services

125. Gur A Baradharaw Kod Torres Strait Sea and Land Council Torres Strait Islander and Aboriginal Corporation

126. Confidential

127. Registrar of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Corporations

128. P&E Law

129. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority

130. Mabo Centre and National Native Title Council

131. S Munro

132. Confidential

133. S Lawes

134. Powerlink Queensland

135. Seqwater

136. Cattle Australia

137. Cape York Regional Organisations

138. G Wilson

139. Confidential

140. NSW Bar Association

141. Australian Energy Producers

142. Dambimangari Aboriginal Corporation

143. Local Government Association of the Northern Territory

144. PKKP Aboriginal Corporation

145. E Raeside

146. First Nations Legal and Research Services

147. First Nations Bailai, Gurang, Gooreng Gooreng, Taribelang Bunda People Aboriginal Corporation RNTBC

148. Yamatji Marlpa Aboriginal Corporation

149. Northern Territory Government

150. B Wignall

151. Kimberley Land Council

152. State of Queensland

153. Northern Land Council

154. Kyburra Munda Yalga Aboriginal Corporation RNTBC

155. Western Australian Water Users Coalition

156. South Australian Government

157. Parallax Legal

158. Jabalbina Yalanji Aboriginal Corporation RNTBC

159. NSW Government

1. I, the Hon Mark Dreyfus KC MP, Attorney-General of Australia, following consultation with Health Ministers, and having regard to:

• the role that cell, tissue and organ donation, retrieval and transplantation can play in improving the lives of Australians;
• that Australia has a long standing national approach to cell, tissue and organ donation, retrieval and transplantation operating cross-jurisdictionally;
• that changing community expectations and evolving technology may be affecting how relevant laws should consider cell, tissue and organ donation, retrieval and transplantation;
• significant developments in human tissue donation, retrieval and use for social, clinical and research purposes, including co-modification and potential trafficking;
• the complex ethical issues that may arise in matters relating to donation, retrieval and use of human cell, tissue and organ donation, including ethical sourcing;
• current inconsistencies in legislative arrangements across Australian jurisdictions.

REFER to the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) for inquiry and report under the Australian Law Reform Commission Act 1996, consideration of whether, and if so what, reforms are necessary or desirable to harmonise and modernise human tissue laws and across Australian jurisdictions.

• In particular, the ALRC should conduct a principles-based review of the following matters:
  • authorisation to donate, retrieve, and transplant human tissue across Australia;
  • inconsistencies across existing laws relating to cell, tissue and organ donation and retrieval arrangements from living and deceased persons;
  • definition/s of death;
  • post-mortem examinations (whole cadavers and body parts);
  • definitions of tissue;
  • disclosure of information provisions;
  • consent arrangements (including for minors) and delegation functions of next of kin;
  • definitions of minors, adults and next of kin;
  • the regulation of ‘schools of anatomy’ and donation for education purposes;
  • frameworks across all Australian jurisdictions pertaining to the donation and retrieval of cells, tissues and organs from a living and deceased person;
  • the advertising of, and trade in, cells, tissues and organs;
  • cost recovery, financial and infrastructural considerations related to the manufacture and provision of tissue;
  • any other relevant matter.

The ALRC should consider whether, and if so how, implementation of any reforms that the ALRC recommends should be staged or prioritised.

2. Scope of the reference

In undertaking its review, the ALRC should consider:

• equity and ethical approaches to improving access to cell, tissue and organ transplantation;
• contemporary research, emerging technologies and clinical practices for cell, tissue and organ donation, retrieval and transplantation, including antemortem interventions and perfusion technologies;
• any other relevant matter, including international experience and approaches.

3. Consultation

In performing its functions in relation to this reference the ALRC shall ensure widespread public consultation, and identify and consult with key stakeholders, including relevant government agencies, the research community, the health and medical sector, the biotechnology sector, industry bodies and lived experience cohorts, including the families of deceased donors and recipients of cell, tissue and organ transplantation.

4. The Commission is to report to the Attorney-General by 16 August 2026.

The Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) has been asked to inquire into human tissue laws. 

The Terms of Reference for this Inquiry ask the ALRC to explore matters including: 

• Donation, retrieval and transplant of human cells, tissues and organs
• Consent arrangements
• Regulation of ‘schools of anatomy’ and donation for education purposes
• Frameworks across all Australian jurisdictions relating to donation and retrieval of cells, tissues and organs from living and deceased persons
• Cost recovery, financial and other considerations relating to manufacture and provision of tissue 

The ALRC is also asked to consider: 

• Equity and ethical approaches to improving access to cell, tissue and organ transplantation
• Contemporary and emerging technologies and practices
• International experience and approaches 

The ALRC has been asked to provide its final report to the Attorney-General by 16 August 2026.

Contact us:

For enquiries, please email [email protected].

I, the Hon Mark Dreyfus KC MP, Attorney-General of Australia, having regard to

• surrogacy providing Australians who are unable to give birth an opportunity to have a child;
• the medically, emotionally, financially and legally complex nature of surrogacy arrangements;
• the legislative responsibilities that states and territories have with regards to surrogacy laws, and current inconsistencies in legislative arrangements across Australian jurisdictions;
• the human rights of children born of surrogacy, their surrogate mothers and intended parents, and the risks commercial surrogacy can pose to vulnerable women and children;
• the increasing access by Australians to surrogacy arrangements and services overseas.

REFER to the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) for inquiry and report, pursuant to s 20(1) of the Australian Law Reform Commission Act 1996 (Cth), a review of Australian surrogacy laws, policies and practices to identify legal and policy reforms, particularly proposals for uniform or complementary state, territory and Commonwealth laws, that:

• are consistent with Australia’s obligations under international law and conventions; and
• protect and promote the human rights of children born as a result of surrogacy arrangements, surrogates and intending parents, noting that the best interests of children are paramount.

In particular, the ALRC is asked to consider:

• how to reduce barriers to domestic altruistic surrogacy arrangements in Australia, including by ensuring surrogates are adequately reimbursed for legal, medical and other expenses incurred as a consequence of the surrogacy;
• how surrogacy arrangements made outside of Australia should be addressed by Australian law;
• what is the appropriate recognition of legal parentage in Australia for children born of surrogacy overseas, and how may citizenship, visa and passport requirements for children born of surrogacy overseas be aligned;
• the information that should be available to children born from surrogacy arrangements, including what information should be included on a child’s birth certificate in order to meet Australia’s human rights obligations under the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

In undertaking its inquiry, the ALRC should consider Australia’s human rights obligations and any findings and recommendations of the 2021 Working Group on Surrogacy Final Report to Attorneys-General and Relevant Ministers: Opportunities to achieve national consistency in surrogacy regulation in Australia, the 2016 House of Representatives Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs Surrogacy Matters report and Australian Government response, the 2013 Family Law Council report on Parentage and the Family Law Act 1975, the 2009 report of the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General A Proposal for a National Model to Harmonise Regulation of Surrogacy, the UN Special Rapporteur on the sale and sexual exploitation of children 2019 Thematic study of safeguards for the protection of the rights of children born from surrogacy arrangements and 2018 Thematic study on surrogacy and sale of children, and relevant reviews of state and territory surrogacy legislation since 2017.

Consultation

In performing its functions in relation to this reference the ALRC will undertake public consultation, and identify and consult with key stakeholders, including relevant government departments  and agencies, legal advocacy and human rights bodies in Australia, members of the legal profession and other experts who specialise in surrogacy or human rights matters, members of the medical, psychology or counselling profession who specialise in surrogacy matters, fertility industry bodies and lived experience cohorts, including surrogates, intended parents and individuals born from surrogacy arrangements.

Timeframe

The ALRC should provide its final report to the Attorney-General by 29 July 2026.

The Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) has been asked to inquire into surrogacy laws. 

The Terms of Reference for this Inquiry ask the ALRC to conduct a review of Australian surrogacy laws, policies and practices to identify legal and policy reforms, particularly proposals for uniform or complementary state, territory and Commonwealth laws, that:

• are consistent with Australia’s obligations under international law and conventions; and
• protect and promote the human rights of children born as a result of surrogacy arrangements, surrogates and intending parents, noting that the best interests of children are paramount.

In particular, the ALRC is asked to consider:

• how to reduce barriers to domestic altruistic surrogacy arrangements in Australia, including by ensuring surrogates are adequately reimbursed for legal, medical and other expenses incurred as a consequence of the surrogacy;
• how surrogacy arrangements made outside of Australia should be addressed by Australian law;
• what is the appropriate recognition of legal parentage in Australia for children born of surrogacy overseas, and how may citizenship, visa and passport requirements for children born of surrogacy overseas be aligned;
• the information that should be available to children born from surrogacy arrangements, including what information should be included on a child’s birth certificate in order to meet Australia’s human rights obligations under the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

The ALRC has been asked to provide its final report to the Attorney-General by 29 July 2026.

Contact us:

For enquiries, please email [email protected]

The ALRC typically forms an advisory committee, or panel of experts, for each Inquiry. The Advisory Committee for the ALRC’s Review of the Future Acts Regime comprises the following:

• Ms Sheila Begg, State Solicitor’s Office, WA
• Mr Jason Behrendt, Chalk and Behrendt
• Ms Leah Cameron, Marrawah Law
• Ms Ann Daniel, Federal Court of Australia
• Professor Megan Davis AC, University of New South Wales
• Mr Tim Goodwin, Victorian Bar
• Professor Marcia Langton AO, University of Melbourne
• Mr Jamie Lowe, National Native Title Council
• Mr Matt Denyer, Minerals Council of Australia
• Ms Elly Patira, Essential Services Commission, Victoria
• Mr Brad Welsh, Energy Resources of Australia
• Professor Peter Yu AM, Australian National University

The ALRC is grateful for all those who have made a submission in response to the Issues Paper for the Justice Responses to Sexual Violence Inquiry. The ALRC will be publishing all submissions as soon as practicable. In recognition of the sensitivities of some submissions and the ALRC’s commitment to a trauma-informed Inquiry process, the ALRC is still processing some submissions for publication. Rather than delay the publication of all submissions, the ALRC will publish submissions in stages.

Please be aware that some of these submissions contain discussion of sexual violence. If you, or someone you know, need help, support services are available here.

More information on how the ALRC treats submission and inquiry material can be found here. 

I, the Hon Mark Dreyfus KC, Attorney-General of Australia, having regard to:

• the operation of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) (Native Title Act) and the future acts regime for over 30 years
• the passage of almost a decade since the last review of the Native Title Act (Connection to Country: Review of the Native Title Act 1993 (ALRC Report 126))
• the significance of the Native Title Act, with native title having now been determined to exist in exclusive and non-exclusive form over a substantial proportion of the Australian land mass, with almost 500 claims determined and more than 100 claims ongoing
• the deep connections of First Nations Australians to Country that are recognised through a determination of native title, and the considerable processes that native title holders have undergone to achieve this legal recognition
• the opportunity for the native title system to contribute significantly to social, cultural,  environmental and economic outcomes for First Nations people, businesses, organisations and communities
• the role of the future acts regime as a precursor to economic and other activities on native title land
• the importance of the future acts regime being appropriately designed for Australia’s current and future social and economic development, in a way that respects the rights and interests of native title holders
• the Australian Government’s agreement in principle with Recommendation 4 of the former Joint Standing Committee on Northern Australia in its report, “A Way Forward”, released in October 2021

refer to the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) for inquiry and report, pursuant to s 20(1) of the Australian Law Reform Commission Act 1996 (Cth), a review of the future acts regime in the Native Title Act (Part 2, Division 3 of the Native Title Act).

In particular, the ALRC is asked to consider:

• the intention of the Native Title Act, as stated in its preamble, to be a special measure for the advancement of First Nations peoples, and to ensure native title holders are able to fully enjoy their rights and interests
• the current operation of the future acts regime, including Indigenous land use agreements (ILUAs), and related parts of the Native Title Act, with the aim of rectifying any inefficacy, inequality or unfairness
• options for efficiencies in the future acts regime to reduce the time and cost of compliance for all parties
• the rights and obligations recognised in the international instruments to which Australia is a party or which it has pledged to support, including the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
• options within laws and legal frameworks to support native title groups to effectively engage with the future acts regime and to support consensus within groups in relation to proposed future acts
• options to support native title groups, project proponents and governments to share in the benefits of development on native title land, including opportunities for native title groups to lead or co-lead development, and for ensuring native title groups receive commensurate and timely compensation for the diminution of native title rights and interests caused by future acts
• options for how the future acts regime can support fair negotiations and encourage proponents and native title groups to work collaboratively in relation to future acts
• the different levels of procedural rights of native title groups in relation to different types of future acts and whether these are appropriately aligned with the impacts on native title rights and interests
• whether the Native Title Act appropriately provides for new and emerging industries engaging in future acts
• the National Native Title Tribunal’s role in relation to future acts
• how the rights in the future acts regime compare with other land rights regimes, such as the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976 (Cth), and any relevant international approaches
• options to strengthen data collection and appropriate data transparency to support the operation of the future acts regime.

The ALRC is asked to conduct the review with regard to the Socio-economic Outcomes and Priority Reforms of the National Agreement on Closing the Gap.

In undertaking its review, the ALRC should consider any findings and recommendations of inquiries, review processes and reports that the ALRC considers relevant, including other work underway to address recommendations arising from the A Way Forward
report.

Consultation

The ALRC should identify and consult key users of the native title system, including native title holders, future acts proponents, relevant government departments and agencies and other non-government stakeholders.

Timeframe

The ALRC should provide its final report to the Attorney-General by 31 March 2026

The Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) has been asked to inquire into the future acts regime in the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) (‘Native Title Act’). 

This Inquiry forms part of the Government’s commitment in response to the Joint Standing Committee on Northern Australia’s report on the destruction of First Nations cultural heritage, A Way Forward. In undertaking this reference, the ALRC will have regard to the Socio-economic Outcomes and Priority Reforms of the National Agreement on Closing the Gap and will consider work underway to address recommendations arising from the A Way Forward Report.

The Terms of Reference for this Inquiry ask the ALRC to consider:  

• the operation of the Native Title Act and the future acts regime for over 30 years;
• the passage of almost a decade since the last review of the Native Title Act (Connection to Country: Review of the Native Title Act 1993 (ALRC Report 126));
• the significance of the Native Title Act, with native title having now been determined to exist in exclusive and non-exclusive form over a substantial proportion of the Australian land mass, with almost 500 claims determined and a more than 100 claims ongoing;
• the deep connections of First Nations Australians to Country that are recognised through a determination of native title, and the considerable processes that native title holders have undergone to achieve this legal recognition;
• the opportunity for the native title system to contribute significantly to social, cultural, environmental and economic outcomes for First Nations people, businesses, organisations and communities;
• the role of the future acts regime as a precursor to economic and other activities on native title land;
• the importance of the future acts regime being appropriately designed for Australia’s current and future social and economic development, in a way that respects the rights and interests of native title holders; and
• the Australian Government’s agreement in principle with Recommendation 4 of the former Joint Standing Committee on Northern Australia in its report, A Way Forward, released in October 2021.

The ALRC has been asked to provide its final report to the Attorney-General by 31 March 2026.

Contact us:

For enquiries, please email [email protected]