❓ A WA parliamentary question scrutinizes the consultation process, expert panel composition, and legislative choices behind the Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) and Surrogacy Bill 2025, with the government defending its approach based on extensive reviews and jurisdictional comparisons.
AnsweredQoN 516Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
(1) In relation to the Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) and Surrogacy Bill 2025, I ask: (a) Which women’s advocacy groups, feminist organisations, or independent experts in women’s rights were invited to participate in the consultation process; (b) On what dates were they consulted, and in what format (briefings, written submissions, public meetings); and (c) What feedback was provided by those groups, and how was that feedback incorporated into the drafting of the Bill: (i) If no such groups were consulted, why not? (2) Who determined the composition of the Ministerial Expert Panel on ART and Surrogacy: (a) What criteria were used to select panel members; and (b) Were any members assessed for potential conflicts of interest: (i) If so, how were conflicts of interest managed; and; and (ii) Why were independent women’s rights advocates not included on the panel? (3) Why was the Law Reform Commission of Western Australian not asked to review this Bill, given its precedent role in comparable reforms in other jurisdictions: (a) Was the Commission consulted informally: (i) If so, on what date; and (b) Will the Government commit to referring the Bill to the Commission before proceeding further? (4) Did the Government consider referring the Bill to a parliamentary committee for review: (a) If not, why was committee scrutiny bypassed; and (b) Will the Minister commit to allowing committee consideration before the Bill proceeds to third reading? (5) In tabling the Bill, the Government claimed it is intended to “harmonise” WA’s laws with those of other states: (a) Which States’ legislation were reviewed in preparing this Bill; (b) On what dates were those reviews last updated; (c) What assessment was made of whether those state laws remain contemporary and protective of women’s rights; and (d) Why was the ongoing Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) review into surrogacy not allowed to conclude before proceeding with this legislation? (6) In relation to transparency: (a) When were stakeholders first given notice of the Government’s intention to legislate on proposed changes of this magnitude; (b) Which stakeholders were invited to provide written submissions; (c) Were any submissions made public: (i) If not, why not; and (d) Will the Government table in Parliament a full list of stakeholders consulted and copies of all submissions received? (7) Why did the Government decide to treat ART and surrogacy as a single legislative matter in the Assisted Reproductive Technology and Surrogacy Bill 2025, given that these are distinct practices with different legal, ethical, and medical implications, and given the significance of proposed changes of this magnitude: (a) What advice did the Minister receive on this point, and from whom; (b) Were any alternative approaches considered, such as separate legislative frameworks; (c) What assessment was made of potential risks in combining the two issues under one Act, particularly in relation to women’s rights and protections; and (d) Has the Government reviewed comparative models in other jurisdictions that keep ART and surrogacy legislation separate: (i) If so, what were the findings?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
15 October 2025
Responded by
Minister for Health
Response time
8 days
(1) (a)-(c)(i)
The Bill is based on extensive stakeholder consultation via the Associate Professor Sonia Allan Review and the Ministerial Expert Panel (the Panel) Review (targeted review) which also included a public Discussion Paper. These reviews were open for comment by all bodies including but not limited to women’s interest groups.
Consultation for the Sonia Allan Review occurred between 13 January 2018 and 16 March 2018 with late submissions accepted until July 2018. Consultation for the Panel review occurred between June and November 2022. Consultation occurred through a range of mechanisms including public forums, online surveys and calls for submissions.
(2) (a)-(b)(ii)
The then Minister for Health, the Honourable Amber-Jade Sanderson determined the composition of the Panel which included a range of experts on topics relevant to Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) and surrogacy including reproduction and women’s health experts.
All members completed a conflict-of-interest form and conflicts of interest were managed in line with the Public Sector Commission Integrity Coordinating Groups conflict of interest guidelines.
(3)-(4)
The Bill has been subject to extensive consultations and review processes and is subject to further review through WA Parliament.
(5) (a)-(d)
In preparing this Bill, the legislation of all other Australian jurisdictions and some overseas jurisdictions was continuously reviewed.
The Western Australian community have been waiting for legislative reform since a commitment the previous iteration of the Bill was introduced into Parliament in 2018.
(6) (a)-(d)
The Government outlined their in-principal support for the development of new framework and legislation on ART and surrogacy, in the Government’s response to the Sonia Allan Review in July 2021.
In 2022 the Government convened the Panel to undertake further review of areas identified as requiring additional consideration. The work of the Panel included targeted, and public consultation of which submissions were received.
A summary of key issues from submissions were included in the Panel Final Report which is publicly available.
(7) (a)-(d)
The Panel recommended that the Human Reproductive Technology Act 1991, the Surrogacy Act 2008 and the Artificial Conception Act 1985 be repealed and replaced with a single Act combining the treatment and practice of ART and surrogacy.
The legislative frameworks of all Australian jurisdictions have been considered in the development of this Bill. Like Western Australia’s proposed approach, Victoria has one piece of legislation that governs ART and surrogacy.
The Bill is based on extensive stakeholder consultation via the Associate Professor Sonia Allan Review and the Ministerial Expert Panel (the Panel) Review (targeted review) which also included a public Discussion Paper. These reviews were open for comment by all bodies including but not limited to women’s interest groups.
Consultation for the Sonia Allan Review occurred between 13 January 2018 and 16 March 2018 with late submissions accepted until July 2018. Consultation for the Panel review occurred between June and November 2022. Consultation occurred through a range of mechanisms including public forums, online surveys and calls for submissions.
(2) (a)-(b)(ii)
The then Minister for Health, the Honourable Amber-Jade Sanderson determined the composition of the Panel which included a range of experts on topics relevant to Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) and surrogacy including reproduction and women’s health experts.
All members completed a conflict-of-interest form and conflicts of interest were managed in line with the Public Sector Commission Integrity Coordinating Groups conflict of interest guidelines.
(3)-(4)
The Bill has been subject to extensive consultations and review processes and is subject to further review through WA Parliament.
(5) (a)-(d)
In preparing this Bill, the legislation of all other Australian jurisdictions and some overseas jurisdictions was continuously reviewed.
The Western Australian community have been waiting for legislative reform since a commitment the previous iteration of the Bill was introduced into Parliament in 2018.
(6) (a)-(d)
The Government outlined their in-principal support for the development of new framework and legislation on ART and surrogacy, in the Government’s response to the Sonia Allan Review in July 2021.
In 2022 the Government convened the Panel to undertake further review of areas identified as requiring additional consideration. The work of the Panel included targeted, and public consultation of which submissions were received.
A summary of key issues from submissions were included in the Panel Final Report which is publicly available.
(7) (a)-(d)
The Panel recommended that the Human Reproductive Technology Act 1991, the Surrogacy Act 2008 and the Artificial Conception Act 1985 be repealed and replaced with a single Act combining the treatment and practice of ART and surrogacy.
The legislative frameworks of all Australian jurisdictions have been considered in the development of this Bill. Like Western Australia’s proposed approach, Victoria has one piece of legislation that governs ART and surrogacy.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.