The short answer
Plebiscite (Future Migration Level) Bill 2018: what it proposed and why it did not proceed
The Plebiscite (Future Migration Level) Bill 2018, introduced by Senator Pauline Hanson on 15 August 2018, would establish a legislative framework for a national plebiscite asking Australians whether the current rate of immigration is too high, to be held alongside the next general election. The bill is before the Senate and has not passed. It has been on the notice paper since 2018 without progressing to a vote.
This is a federal system guide. State constitutions, parliaments and local-government laws can allocate comparable functions differently.
The useful question is not only “what is the rule?” but also “who administers it, which document controls it, and when might it change?” That distinction prevents an accurate general explanation from becoming wrong advice in a particular election, chamber or policy setting.
Evidence review
What the bill proposed
The bill sought to establish a legal framework for a national plebiscite on Australia's immigration rate. The central mechanism was a single yes-or-no question — "Do you think the current rate of immigration to Australia is too high?" — to be put to Australian voters at the next general election.
The bill did not seek to change Australia's migration program, visa categories, or immigration targets. A plebiscite, unlike a referendum under section 128 of the Constitution, does not change any law. Its outcome is advisory rather than binding on the government. The bill was a private senator's bill, meaning it was introduced by Senator Hanson rather than the government. Private bills rarely pass without government backing.
Evidence review
Legislative history and status
The bill was introduced in the Senate on 15 August 2018 during the 48th Parliament, which sat from 30 August 2016 until it was dissolved on 11 April 2019 for the federal election held on 18 May 2019. According to the Parliament of Australia's bill tracking page, the bill's status remained "Before Senate" throughout its life. It never reached a second reading debate, was never referred to a committee, and never proceeded to a vote.
Under parliamentary standing orders, bills that have not passed both Houses lapse when a Parliament is dissolved. This bill lapsed on 11 April 2019 with the dissolution of the 48th Parliament. The bill's reference to a plebiscite "in conjunction with the next general election" means that even if it had passed, the relevant election — the 2019 federal election — has long since occurred. The proposal is now effectively spent.
Evidence review
Plebiscites in Australian law and practice
Australia has held very few national plebiscites. The most prominent examples are the conscription plebiscites of 1916 and 1917, and the 1977 national song plebiscite. The 2017 Australian Marriage Law Postal Survey, while not a plebiscite in legal form, operated similarly as a non-binding national poll conducted by the Australian Bureau of Statistics rather than the AEC.
Under the Referendum (Machinery Provisions) Act 1984, the Commonwealth can conduct a plebiscite using electoral machinery, but a plebiscite does not require the double-majority threshold for constitutional change. A plebiscite result has no direct legal effect — Parliament remains free to act contrary to the result. The bill did not specify detailed machinery provisions, relying on the existing electoral apparatus.
Evidence review
Immigration policy context in 2018
The bill was introduced when Australia's permanent migration program was set at a planning ceiling of 190,000 places annually, though actual intake was lower — 162,417 permanent visas were granted in 2017–18. Net overseas migration, which includes temporary migrants, was approximately 236,700 in the year to June 2018 according to ABS data.
Immigration levels were actively debated in 2018. The Coalition government had begun reducing the permanent migration ceiling. Some crossbench senators, including Senator Hanson, argued for deeper cuts. The bill's question — asking only whether immigration is "too high" — contains an implicit framing. It does not ask whether immigration is too low or about right, and makes no distinction between permanent, temporary, and humanitarian intake. Question phrasing can significantly influence plebiscite outcomes.
Evidence review
Why the bill did not pass
Private senators' bills face structural obstacles. Without government support or a majority of senators willing to grant precedence, a private bill sits on the notice paper indefinitely. The government controls the legislative program in both chambers, and the Senate has limited time for private members' business. A bill that lacks cross-party support — particularly one on a politically polarising topic — has low prospects of reaching a vote.
The bill's timing also worked against it. Introduced in August 2018, it had less than eight months before the 48th Parliament was dissolved in April 2019. The final sitting period of a Parliament is typically dominated by government legislation, budget measures, and supply bills, leaving little room for private senators' proposals.
A further obstacle was the bill's subject matter. The Australian government sets migration levels through the annual budget process and the migration program planning levels, informed by advice from the Department of Home Affairs and consultation with states and territories. Introducing a popular vote on the general direction of immigration would represent a significant departure from Australia's established policy-making approach, and neither major party supported such a mechanism.
Evidence review
What the official sources confirm
The bill and its explanatory memorandum are available on the Parliament of Australia website at aph.gov.au. The official bill homepage confirms the bill's introduction on 15 August 2018, its current status as 'Before Senate', and that no second reading debate has occurred. The Parliament of Australia bills list also confirms Senator Pauline Hanson as the sponsor.
The explanatory memorandum sets out the bill's stated purpose: to establish a legislative framework for a national plebiscite to be held in conjunction with the next general election that would ask Australians whether they think the current rate of immigration is too high. It includes a financial impact statement indicating the plebiscite would be conducted alongside a general election to minimise cost. The bill does not contain provisions for what action the government would take based on the plebiscite result.
The official record confirms that the bill has remained before the Senate without progression since its introduction in 2018. No committee inquiry has been conducted, no second reading debate has occurred, and no votes have been held. This is consistent with the status of many private senators' bills that are introduced but not scheduled for debate.
Common questions
Before you rely on the answer
What is the difference between a plebiscite and a referendum in Australia?
A referendum is a vote to change the Australian Constitution and is binding if it passes with a double majority (a national majority of voters plus a majority of voters in a majority of states). A plebiscite is a national vote on a policy question that does not change the Constitution. Its result is advisory rather than legally binding. The Plebiscite (Future Migration Level) Bill 2018 proposed a plebiscite, not a referendum.
Did this bill actually become law?
No. The bill was introduced in the Senate on 15 August 2018 and listed as 'Before Senate' throughout the 48th Parliament. It never progressed to a second reading debate or a vote. It lapsed when the 48th Parliament was dissolved on 11 April 2019 ahead of the federal election held on 18 May 2019.
Would the plebiscite result have forced the government to change immigration policy?
No. Even if the bill had passed and the plebiscite had been held, a plebiscite result in Australia is advisory only. The government would have been under no legal obligation to change the migration program in response to the vote. Australia's immigration intake is set through the annual budget process under the Migration Act 1958 and associated regulations, not by popular vote.
Has Australia ever held a national plebiscite on immigration before?
No. Australia has never held a national plebiscite specifically on immigration levels. The country has held very few national plebiscites: the two conscription plebiscites of 1916 and 1917, and the national song plebiscite of 1977. The 2017 Marriage Law Postal Survey was a non-compulsory postal survey rather than a formal plebiscite, but operated on a similar principle of gauging public opinion on a policy question.
Source spine
Primary material used for this guide
Review trigger: Review if bill is reintroduced in a future Parliament or if new plebiscite legislation is proposed.
Archive note: Based on the bill as recorded on the Parliament of Australia website on 17 July 2026. The bill lapsed in 2019. Check aph.gov.au for current status.
Primary links are provided without affiliate or tracking parameters. Confirm that the source still applies to the bill, sitting date, jurisdiction or reporting period before relying on it.