In an unexpected move, Anthony Albanese has revised his contentious proposal concerning firearms and hate crime legislation, just days before its scheduled introduction in Parliament.

During an impromptu press conference on Saturday, the Prime Minister announced his decision to divide the Bill into two distinct parts. This strategic shift aims to facilitate the passage of new gun regulations, following opposition from both the Coalition and the Greens regarding the proposed amendments to hate speech laws.

The legislative package, initially crafted in response to the Bondi Beach terrorist incident, is slated for presentation in the House on Tuesday.

Albanese stated, “We will separate the bills—introducing gun laws in one, while the provisions on hate crimes and migration will be addressed separately.”

He further clarified, “We will not advance the racial vilification sections, as they clearly lack the necessary support.”

“Our approach is to move forward only with legislation that garners parliamentary approval,” he added.

Albanese called on the Coalition to ‘come up with what their position is’. 

He added: ‘We want to know what their position is on these measures because… we don’t want there to be an ongoing debate of conflict.’

Anthony Albanese (pictured on Saturday) said the government will abandon the racial vilification provisions as they would not have the support of Parliament

Opposition leader Sussan Ley (pictured) said the legislation is ‘pretty unsalvageable’ after refusing to support the new hate laws

Federal MPs will debate the proposed new gun laws in Parliament on Tuesday, which includes a national gun buyback scheme as set up after the Port Arthur massacre

Opposition Leader Sussan Ley previously described the legislation as ‘pretty unsalvageable’. 

‘Laws of this seriousness demand precision, confidence and clarity,’ she said. 

‘Now, the opposition will continue to scrutinise this legislation carefully but from what we have seen so far, it looks pretty unsalvageable. As it stands, the government’s proposal is half-baked and Australians deserve far better.’

She said the Coalition would seek to advance their own package of measures when parliament meets.

‘Under our package, our message to those who preach hatred, who preach radical Islamic extremist hatred, glorify terrorism or incite violence, it’s very clear – if you’re not an Australian citizen, you will be deported and if you are an Australian citizen, you will be arrested,’ Ley said.

‘That is what we will be seeking to achieve when the parliament returns. 

‘The parliament has to eradicate anti-Semitism and remove radical Islam. Those are our tests.’

Just hours before Albanese announced the Bill would be split, Greens leader Larissa Waters said the legislation needed a ‘huge amount of work’ to pass. 

Greens leader Larissa Waters said the party is ‘willing to work with Labor to find a way forward on laws to combat hate in our communities’ but couldn’t support the current Bill

‘The rest of the omnibus Bill however needs too much reworking to meet community concerns. We need to keep all people in the community safe from discrimination and hatred, but good laws don’t come from rushed work,’ she wrote on X.

‘With each passing hour, more concerns are raised by legal experts, faith groups and communities. The Greens won’t support laws that may risk criminalising legitimate political expression.

‘The risk of unintended consequences is too great to rush passage of this legislation.’

Labor said the original Bill, which included criminalising hate speech, creating a new ‘hate group’ listing, establishing a gun buyback and introducing  new grounds to reject or cancel visas, would strengthen national security and national unity.

However, free speech advocates and human rights watchers questioned whether adding the concept of ‘hatred’ in speech to criminal law could be too open to interpretation by the courts.

They said the racial vilification provisions, which have now been abandoned, would require a court to find that an individual charged with that crime had ‘intent’ to cause hatred, and that the conduct would cause a ‘reasonable’ person from that targeted group to ‘fear harassment, intimidation or violence, or for their safety.’

Concerns were also raised about the new listing for ‘hate groups’, which would criminalise membership or support of a designated organisation, with some suggesting the definition is so broad it could capture academics and journalists. 

Firearms groups have also pushed back against the proposed gun reforms amid concerns they will impact Australia’s Olympic shooters.

Firearms groups said gun owners should be paid at least market value in the buyback scheme

The proposed changes should not impact athletes who compete internationally, and there will be exemptions to allow those with genuine needs – including sports shooters, primary producers and professional shooters – to access necessary equipment.

However, the Sporting Shooters Association of Australia, which manages competitive shooting, has warned import restrictions on gun accessories such as shotgun vests and speed loaders would make life harder for elite competitors.

Clay target shooters often wear a vest to carry extra ammunition, and the discipline is practised all the way up to Olympic level.

Speed loaders are used in ‘practical shooting’ matches that are not included in Olympic or Commonwealth Games, but gun groups say they help attract new shooters to the sport.

The proposed changes would not ban accessories, allowing sports shooters to import them with the appropriate permits, AAP has been told.

Gun Control Australia, which advocates for a reduction in the number of firearms around the nation, backed the treatment of firearm accessories as controlled items.

‘(This) reflects the reality that the risks posed by modern firearms extend beyond complete weapons to the supply chain for critical components,’ the group said.

‘Closing these loopholes is an essential modernisation.’

There are concerns the gun reform laws could impact Australia’s Olympic shooting team

Firearm Owners United said the federal government needed to ensure gun owners were paid at least market value for surrendered firearms.

The group urged Labor to outline exactly how much it was willing to spend on the buyback.

The federal government hopes to fund the scheme jointly with the states, but faces pushback from the Northern Territory and Tasmania, where leaders have raised concerns about the potential costs.

Gun Control Australia strongly backed the buyback, saying it would help remove high-risk weapons from circulation.