This Bills Digest replaces a preliminary Digest published on 10 February 2025 to assist in early consideration of the Bill.
Introductory Info
Date of introduction: 6 February 2025
House introduced in: House of Representatives
Portfolio: Education
Commencement: The Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence) Bill 2025 (the Bill) commences the day after Royal Assent.
The Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence) (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2025 (the related Bill) commences on the later of the day after Royal Assent and the commencement of the Bill. However, the provisions do not commence at all if the Bill does not commence.
Untitled Document
The purpose of the Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence) Bill 2025 (the Bill) and the Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence) (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2025 (the related Bill) is to continue governance reforms initiated following the release of the Universities Accord (the Accord).
Clause 3 sets out the objects of the Bill:
The objects of this Act are:
(a) to reduce the incidence of gender-based violence in higher education; and
(b) to establish national standards and requirements for higher education providers to prevent and respond to gender-based violence; and
(c) to establish a regulatory framework to monitor and enforce compliance with the national standards and requirements.
The Bill would enable the Minister to make, by legislative instrument, a National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence (the National Code) (clause 15). It appears that the code would be subject to disallowance under section 42 of the Legislation Act 2003. The related Bill makes compliance with the National Code a condition of being approved as a higher education provider under the Higher Education Support Act 2003 (HESA) (proposed section19-20 of HESA, at item1 of the related Bill). The Government released a proposed National Code with the introduction of the Bills.
The Bill follows the passage of the Universities Accord (National Student Ombudsman) Bill 2024 at the end of 2024, which established an avenue for individuals to escalate complaints against higher education providers on issues including gender-based violence. While designed to complement the Ombudsman, this Bill establishes its own independent regulatory framework. The Bill provides monitoring, investigation and enforcement powers for the Secretary of the Department of Education and allows enforcement through civil penalties, infringement notices, enforceable undertakings and injunctions (Part 6).
A dedicated unit in the Department of Education would oversee the National Code.
The Bill is divided into 8 parts:
Part 1 sets out the commencement of the Bill, the objects of the Bill and relevant definitions.
Part 2 sets out the basic principles for regulation, which the Secretary and authorised officers must comply with when exercising powers, including the principles of regulatory necessity and proportionate regulation.
Part 3 enables the Minister to make the National Code, sets out its purpose and provides that the Code may impose requirements on higher education providers in connection with that purpose.
Part 4 sets out the obligations of higher education providers, including compliance with the National Code and a requirement to share information with the Secretary.
Part 5 sets out the powers of the Secretary and officials, including power for the Secretary to require certain information to be provided.
Part 6 sets out the compliance and enforcement powers, including civil penalties, infringement notices, enforceable undertakings and injunctions.
Part 7 sets out the management of information, including public disclosure of information.
Part 8 contains miscellaneous provisions, including the delayed commencement of compliance and enforcement powers.
The Bills form part of a broader suite of reforms related to both higher education and gender‑based violence. An emphasis on higher education providers and safety on campus and in residential halls reflects concerns at the high rates of sexual assaults and harassment being reported by students.
These concerns are long standing. In reviewing data on the prevalence of cases of sexual assault and harassment reported by students, the Australian Human Rights Centre’s 2017 report, On Safe Ground: Strengthening Australian university responses to sexual assault and harassment,drew upon a number of previous surveys and investigations, such as the National Union of Students (NUS) ‘Talk About It’ surveys from 2011 and from 2015 and the Australian Human Rights Commission 2017 report Change the course: national report on sexual assault and sexual harassment at Australian universities. Change the course itself drew upon the 2016 National Student Safety Survey results. In analysing the latter report, On Safe Ground identified ‘three significant factors’:
- that, in line with findings by the NUS, there are concerning levels of sexual assault and harassment within Australian university settings;
- that women students, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students, culturally and linguistically diverse students (CALD) and international students, students with disability, and LGBTIQ students are more likely to experience incidents of sexual assault and harassment; and
- that the response of many universities to addressing complaints of sexual assault and harassment is often inappropriate or inadequate, with students being disbelieved or blamed, their confidentiality being breached, or universities failing to act in response to their reports. (p. 11)
On Safe Ground identified ‘six foundational principles that should inform Australian university policies and procedures on sexual assault and harassment, namely:’
- integrated and inclusive framework;
- comprehensive, consistent and coordinated design and content;
- accessible, transparent and enforceable processes;
- resourced, interconnected and responsive support services
- collaborative links with external sexual assault services
- institutional commitment to prevention framework (pp. 11–12)
The 2017 findings were further confirmed by the 2021 National Student Safety Survey, which found that 1 in 6 students had experienced sexual harassment and 1 in 20 had experienced sexual assault in a campus environment. Additionally, criticisms were levelled at universities’ handling of complaints, including whether processes were sufficiently explained to victim‑survivors. Where formal complaints were made about sexual assault, fewer than half were satisfied with the process overall (p. 45).
Australian Universities Accord interim report and final report
Released in July 2023, the Australian Universities Accord Interim Report (Interim Report), picked up on the 2021 National Student Safety Survey results that ‘since starting university, 16.1% of participating students had been sexually harassed, and 4.5% had been sexually assaulted’ (p. 119). The Accord panel also:
heard that existing approaches to reduce the incidence of sexual harassment and sexual assault on university campuses are inadequate, with some stakeholders advocating for increased transparency, monitoring and accountability mechanisms. (p. 119)
One of the Interim Report’s proposals for consideration for the Final Report, was:
Improving student wellbeing and accountability:
a. developing a national student charter, in collaboration with domestic and international students, ensuring a national commitment and consistent approach to the welfare, safety and wellbeing of all students. (p. 123)
The Interim Report set out five priority actions, which included the following:
Priority Action 5:
Through National Cabinet, immediately engage with state and territory governments and universities to improve university governance, particularly focusing on:
- universities being good employers
- student and staff safety
- membership of governing bodies, including ensuring additional involvement of people with expertise in the business of universities.
Australian governments should work together to strengthen university governing boards by rebalancing their composition to put greater emphasis on higher education expertise. Governing bodies must as a priority do more to improve student and staff wellbeing and become exemplary employers. (p. 7)
Recommendation 18 of the final Accord Final Report, released February 2024, formalised the call for ‘a national student charter that sets out a shared, national commitment to the welfare, safety and wellbeing of all students on campus and online’ (p. 26). It also suggested the charter ‘should be underpinned by a National Student Code that outlines the legislated requirements for timely and fair complaints processes.’ (p. 169)
Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee inquiry
The Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee inquiry (the Senate Inquiry) into current and proposed sexual consent laws in Australia reported in September 2023 on the university sector’s response to the prevalence of sexual violence on campus:
[T]he committee heard that the university sector’s commitment has, at best, waned and, at worst, stalled. Preventative measures and support services are inconsistently delivered at Australian universities. Some universities appear to be approaching consent education and reducing sexual violence within their community proactively and with genuine commitment. Others appear to find the issue too confronting or difficult; their responses might be generously described as inadequate but are, in some cases, outright damaging and deeply troubling. The committee finds such approaches by certain Australian universities utterly unacceptable. (p. 111)
The Committee also noted views that there was a lack of oversight and scrutiny of the university sector’s actions to address sexual violence, including from the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA). The Committee expressed a lack of confidence that the sector would ‘respond appropriately to the crisis without strong intervention’ and called for the establishment of ‘a taskforce with effective powers […] to ensure accountability in the university sector’ (p. 115). The Committee also called for a review of TEQSA’s response to sexual violence on campuses (p. 116).
Action Plan Addressing Gender-based Violence in Higher Education
In response to Priority Action 5 from the Interim Report, national Education Ministers established an inter-jurisdictional working group and agreed for it to provide advice on actions to strengthen university governance in relation to matters including: ‘ensuring student and staff safety through the prevention of gender-based violence and sexual harm, including on university campuses and in student residential settings’ (p. 2).
In November 2023, Minister Clare released a Draft Action Plan Addressing Gender-based Violence in Higher Education for further consultation. The third proposed action was the following: ‘Strengthen provider accountability for systemic issues relating to gender-based violence in consultation with the states, territories and other stakeholders’ (p. 7). It called for this action plan to take the form of several elements, including the following:
The Commonwealth Minister for Education tabling in Parliament, following consultation, a new National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence (National Code) that will set requirements for embedding the whole-of-institution approach (p. 7).
The Accord Final Report noted that the Draft Action Plan was informed by the views of victim‑survivor advocates, student leaders, subject matter experts and representatives from universities and student accommodation providers (p. 241).
The action of establishing the National Code, and the proposed elements that its rules would cover, were confirmed in the final Action Plan Addressing Gender-based Violence in Higher Education (the Action Plan), released in February 2024.
The government also allocated in the 2024 Budget $18.7 million over 4 years from 2024–25 to introduce a National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence from 1 January 2025 (p. 63).
National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children 2022–2032
The reforms in the Bill should also be read in the context of the National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children 2022–2032 (National Plan), which now sits at the centre of gender-based safety measures, including a focus on prevention, early intervention, responses and recovery and healing for victim-survivors.
The Bills most explicitly address these measures by putting penalties in place for higher education providers which fail to address gender-based violence as set out in the National Code or which do not provide adequate support and training services related to the issue of gender-based violence.
National Student Ombudsman
In September 2024, the Government introduced the Universities Accord (National Student Ombudsman) Bill 2024, in accordance with action 1 of the Action Plan. The Bill passed both houses in November 2024, and the National Student Ombudsman commenced its work in February 2025. Its main functions are:
- to deal with complaints about actions taken by higher education providers
- to conduct investigations into actions taken by higher education providers, on the Ombudsman’s own initiative and
- to give higher education providers advice and training on handling complaints.
During his second reading speech for the current Bills, the Minister for Education, Jason Clare, pointed to the creation of that Ombudsman and the introduction of these Bills as proof of the Government’s commitment to addressing student and stakeholder concerns. Minister Clare noted the closure of a key advocacy group—End Rape on Campus—suggesting this was evidence of improved safety, despite the need for ongoing work:
End Rape on Campus was founded in 2016 by Sharna Bremner. She ran it with a small group of committed volunteers, working for free, working to make the lives of students safer—incredibly important work.
When this parliament passed legislation late last year to set up the National Student Ombudsman, they put out this statement:
End Rape on Campus Australia has now permanently closed … Almost 9 years to the day since our founding, we've done the thing that organisations like ours should be aiming to do—we've advocated ourselves out of business. We're incredibly thankful to everyone who has supported us over the years.
End Rape on Campus didn't close because the work to rid our campuses of sexual assault and harassment is complete. It is not.
It was because the government was finally listening—and we were bringing together the resources needed to make a real difference.
That's what the National Student Ombudsman is.
And that's what these bills and the draft national code are.
Proposed National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence 2025
At the same time as introducing the Bills on 6 February, the Government released the proposed National Code. The draft comprises 7 standards:
Standard 1: Accountable leadership and governance - Effective governance and a Whole-of-Organisation approach prioritises safety and support in the prevention of and response to Gender-based Violence.
Standard 2: Safe environments and systems - Higher Education Providers’ environments are safe and systems continuously improve to prevent and respond to Gender-based Violence.
Standard 3: Knowledge and capability - Higher Education Providers build knowledge and capability to safely and effectively prevent and respond to Gender-based Violence.
Standard 4: Safety and support - Responses and support services are safe and person-centred.
Standard 5: Safe processes - All processes are safe and timely.
Standard 6: Data, evidence and impact - Higher Education Providers use evidence to inform their approach, measure change and contribute to the national evidence-base.
Standard 7: Safe Student Accommodation - Student accommodation is safe for all students and staff. (pp. 1–2)
As outlined by Minister Clare, and picked up by some media outlets, the draft code includes provisions relating to the hiring and advancement of employees.
Paragraph 2.1(b) requires higher education providers to:
ask prospective employees and members of the Governing Body to declare whether they have been investigated for an allegation of Gender-based Violence, or determined to have engaged in conduct that constitutes Gender-based Violence during the course of their previous employment, or otherwise in a legal process. [emphasis added]
These declarations are to be considered in determining the person’s suitability for their position (paragraph 2.1(c)). Paragraph 6.10(a) allows the Secretary to require from a provider recruitment data that reports on such declarations. The inclusion of allegations which have been investigated, as opposed to only those which have been proved may give rise to challenges in terms of procedural fairness. It remains to be seen how universities will navigate this requirement in practice, to avoid prospective employees being disadvantaged by an unproven (or disproved) allegation.
The draft National Code requires higher education providers to ask for the same declarations from all (not only prospective) staff at student accommodation it directly owns, operates and/or manages, and to take any declarations into consideration of a person’s suitability for the position (paragraphs 7.1(a) and (b)). Higher education providers would need to ensure that student accommodation providers perform the same vetting tasks on their own staff (paragraphs 7.4(a)(i) and (ii)).
Higher education and student accommodation providers must factor any substantiated allegation they find against a staff member, during their employment or engagement, into consideration of promotion or recognition (paragraphs 2.1(d), 7.1(c) and 7.4(a)(iii). Paragraph 5.3 requires providers to allow disclosures and formal reports to be made anonymously, and providers must investigate all formal reports where the respondent (accused) is a staff or student member, ‘regardless of the context in which the gender-based violence occurs’ (paragraph 5.8).
In February 2024, Liberal Senator Sarah Henderson welcomed the Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence:
Whether they are on campus, online or in student accommodation, keeping students safe including from sexual assault and harassment is a critical responsibility of higher education providers. Too many incidents of gender-based violence and harassment have been swept under the carpet and that is totally unacceptable.
In parliament the Coalition urged the Government to establish an additional National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Anti-Semitism, and expressed concern over the creation of a specialist unit in the Department of Education for a task that it considers should be the part of the regulatory role of TEQSA. The Coalition otherwise supported the Bill.
There has been limited commentary on the legislation for the National Code, likely because it is the concluding legislative piece in a federal policy process that has involved extensive consultation across numerous stages.
Nonetheless, Fair Agenda’s media release noted a welcoming of the Bill by key advocates who had worked on the issue for many years and been part of the Department of Education’s Expert Reference Group, including Fair Agenda, End Rape on Campus Australia’s Sharna Bremner, The STOP Campaign’s Camille Schloeffel and Dr Allison Henry.
Earlier debates on the establishment of the National Student Ombudsman and submissions made to consultation on the National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to gender-based violence issues paper provide some indication of support for the proposed National Code from advocacy groups and stakeholders.
- On the introduction of the Bills, Renee Carr from Fair Agenda said the National Code would create ‘transformative change’ for students.
- In its submission to the consultation, Universities Australia (UA) made 8 recommendations, which included warnings of regulatory overlap and challenges with the Department of Education rather than the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA) overseeing the implementation of a code. Additionally, UA called for a phased implementation of the Code (this has been partly addressed through the delayed application of certain enforcement provisions, clause 46) and for provisions in the Code for providers to ‘establish contractual arrangements with third‑party accommodation providers’ (p. 6).
- OurWatch, an organisation focused on the prevention of violence against women, published its submission to the issues paper supporting the development of a code but noting, among other recommendations, that:
Whole-of-organisation approaches to preventing gender-based violence require a complex and transformative change process. The demands of coordinating a whole-of-university program of work are significant and will require commitments of time and resources as well as a significant and coordinated capability uplift across the university. To support implementation and ongoing compliance with the National Code, consideration will need to be given to resourcing, workforce development and the quality and safety of support from external providers to support capability building. (p. 5)
Submissions to the Senate Standing Committees on Education and Employment inquiry into the Universities Accord (National Student Ombudsman) Bill 2024 , included several expressions of support for legislating for a National Code from Fair Agenda and End Rape on Campus Australia (p. 3), and the STOP Campaign (p. 6). Several (e.g., Go8 (p. 2) and the STOP Campaign (p. 6)) called for the National Code to come into place before or at the same time as the National Student Ombudsman.
Clause 15 of the Bill provides for the Minister to make the National Code by legislative instrument.
It appears that the code would be subject to disallowance under section 42 of the Legislation Act 2003.
The Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills drew attention to the status of the National Code as a legislative instrument. It stated that in the circumstances of designated legislative power and in which ‘breach of the code could lead to a civil penalty and trigger monitoring and investigative powers’, it would ‘generally expect greater detail in the Bill itself as to what the code must contain’ or a more detailed explanation as to why it is appropriate for the code to be in delegated legislation (p. 18).
The Minister may also, through legislative instrument (clause 50), make rules prescribing matters required or permitted, or necessary or convenient, to be prescribed for carrying out or giving effect to the Bill, including in relation to the kinds of records that higher education providers (HEPs) must keep and the manner and form in which they must be kept (clause 21), and regarding the information that HEPs must provide to the Secretary (clause 22).
The National Code
Clause 16 outlines the intended purpose and coverage of the National Code. The purpose is to provide national standards for HEPs for preventing and responding to gender-based violence, around five key elements that cover: safe environments for staff and students, preventive work, effective responses, mitigative actions and effective governance arrangements. Through subclause 16(2), the standards would apply to a wide scope of people and locations, including ‘students or staff of a provider or people receiving services from a provider, whether or not other people are also involved’ and ‘premises owned or controlled by a provider, or any other place’.
Clause 17 provides a 17-item non-exhaustive list of requirements that the National Code ‘may’ include. A HEP that fails to comply with a requirement of the Code may be liable to a civil penalty (under clause 20).
The Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills noted that subclause 17(3) of the Bill overrides subsection 14(2) of the Legislation Act 2003 by providing that the Code may apply, adopt or incorporate any matter contained in any other instrument or writing as in force or existing from time to time. The Committee expressed some reservations about the capacity of the public to access and be aware of such information and requested an addendum to the EM containing information as to whether materials/documents captured by such a provision ‘will be made freely available to all persons interested in the law.’ (pp. 18–19).
Higher education provider obligations
Under the provisions of the Bill, the main obligation for HEPs is to abide by all requirements of the National Code. Failure to comply could result in a civil penalty (clause 20). Applying paragraph 82(5)(a) of the Regulatory Powers (Standard Provisions) Act 2014 (which will apply to the civil penalty provisions of the Bill under subclause 37(1)) the maximum penalty for a body corporate will be 1,000 penalty units ($330,000, as a penalty unit is currently $330 under subsection 4AA(1A) of the Crimes Act 1914).
The note to clause 20 affirms that failure to comply may lead to ‘other consequences’, giving the example of the Minister taking action in relation to a HEP’s approval as a HEP under the Higher Education Support Act 2003(HESA). The related Bill amends HESA by inserting the quality and accountability requirement that HEPs must comply with the National Code by 1 January 2026 (for Table A and B providers) or by 1 January 2027 for other HEPs. This amendment thereby allows for a HEP to lose its approval as a HEP for failure to comply with the National Code.
Beyond complying with the National Code, Part 4 of the Bill provides for obligations for HEPs to keep records and give information to the Secretary in accordance with the rules set by legislative instrument (clauses 21 and 22, see Ministerial Powers section above). Other provisions require HEPs to notify the Secretary of changes to information already given, to notify of contravention or expected contravention of the Act or legislative instruments (clause 23), and to not give false or misleading information (clause 24). All of these provisions in Part 4 carry liability of civil penalty of a maximum of 60 penalty units ($19,800).
Once in force, the powers of regulation in relation to the National Code would reside with the Secretary of the Department for Education. The basic principles for regulation, being those of regulatory necessity and proportionate regulation are set out in Part 2, and apply to the Secretary and authorised officers, the latter being Department of Education employees appointed by the Secretary (clause 33).
Requiring information and issuing compliance notices
The Secretary would be able to require HEPs or a person who is or was connected to a HEP, to provide information relevant to the Secretary’s functions, or relevant to assessing compliance, under the Act or its legislative instruments (clause 27). The Secretary must give at least 14 days’ notice, or 24 hours if a shorter timeframe is necessary. Failure to comply would carry a civil penalty (subclause 27(5)). Subclause 27(4) provides that the type of information the Secretary requires could include personal information (within the meaning of the Privacy Act 1988). The EM states that this personal information may be necessary to evaluate whether a HEP followed its internal policies and procedures, but that it would be collected rarely, only when other information did not allow the Secretary to ‘reasonably ascertain a higher education provider’s compliance with the Bill and the National Code’ (p. 34). Part 5 contains provisions for how the Secretary can ‘retain documents and things’, and requirements for the Secretary to return or dispose of the documents they receive.
Where a person is asked to give information or produce a document, clause 31 abrogates the privilege against self-incrimination; however, it also provides a use immunity, which limits the use of potentially self-incriminating information to certain criminal proceedings such as giving false or misleading information under section 137.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (see the EM, pp. 36–37).
Beyond the civil penalties already mentioned that relate to failure to comply with a requirement under the National Code or with an information request notice from the Secretary, under clause 32, the Secretary may issue in writing a compliance notice, if they believe that a HEP is not or might not be complying with the Act or one of its legislative instruments. As well as specifying the details of the potential non-compliance, the compliance notice must specify what the provider must do to return to compliance or to avoid non-compliance, and specify a timeframe. The Secretary could also require the HEP to provide evidence of what it has done to address the compliance notice, within a certain timeframe. Failure to abide by a compliance notice may result in a civil penalty. The Secretary would have the power to vary or revoke a compliance notice if in the public interest. A compliance notice is also not a prerequisite for other actions (such as issuing an infringement notice) the Secretary could take in accordance with the Act or one of its legislative instruments.
Regulatory roles and actions
Clause 33 provides for the Secretary to appoint an APS employee of the Department of Education as an ‘authorised officer’. Presumably, the authorised officers would belong to the intended ‘new expert unit’ to be implemented in the Department of Education that will oversee HEPs’ compliance with the National Code.
Part 6, proposed Division 2–Regulatory powers applies the Regulatory Powers (Standard Provisions) Act 2014 (Regulatory Powers Act) provisions relating to:
- monitoring powers (clause 35)
- investigation powers (clause 36)
- civil penalty provisions (clause 37)
- infringement notices (clause 38)
- enforceable undertakings (clause 39)
- injunctions (clause 40).
Clause 48 addresses delegation by the Secretary, allowing the Secretary to delegate ‘any or all of [their] functions or powers’ under the Act and its legislative instruments to an APS EL1 in the Department, except for compliance notices and powers under the Regulatory Powers Act, which must be delegated to an SES level employee. Before making a delegation, the Secretary must have regard to whether an APS employee to whom a delegation is proposed to be made occupies a sufficiently senior office or position, or whether the employee has appropriate qualifications or expertise. A delegate must comply with any written directions of the Secretary.
Disclosing information
Part 7, proposed Division 2––Management of information, allows the Secretary to disclose protected information to the Minister and their staff, TEQSA, the National Student Ombudsman, and Commonwealth and state or territory government officers and employees. These persons or bodies can in turn further disclose the information for the same purposes as the original disclosure.
Protected information is defined as personal information within the meaning of the Privacy Act 1988 or information relating to a HEP that was obtained for the purposes of the Act or a legislative instrument (subclause 42(5)). The Secretary may only disclose protected information that is personal information if ‘satisfied that the information will be appropriately protected after disclosure’ (subclause 42(2)).
The Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills found the Bill and its EM:
somewhat unclear [as to] how the secretary will be satisfied of the requirement that they may only disclose personal information if it will be protected after disclosure, particularly as the information can be further used or disclosed. (p. 20)
The Committee recommended consideration be given to amending the Bill to require protected information disclosed under clause 42 to be de-identified ‘if appropriate in the circumstances and if it does not prevent the person from fulfilling the purpose for which the information is disclosed.’ (p. 20)
The Secretary would also be able to disclose information (but not personal information) to the public, for the purpose of promoting compliance, if the information relates to actions that the Secretary has taken as part of their regulatory monitoring and investigation powers, or enforcement powers (including the issuing of compliance notices) (clause 43). The Secretary would have to give the HEP written notice of the details of an intended disclosure to the public, and take into account the HEP’s response. Clause 44 allows the Secretary to require information from a HEP under the National Code, in order to disclose that information to the public, for the purposes of promoting and facilitating compliance with the Act and the National Code, or to assist in eliminating ‘so far as is possible, discrimination on the ground of gender’. The Secretary would not have to give the HEP notification before disclosing information under clause 44, as this information would come from the HEP itself.
