Julian Leeser (Berowra, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

My questions are about what the Attorney has done about the failure of his portfolio agency the Australian Human Rights Commission to appropriately deal with the rise of antisemitism since 7 October. The commission is the institution charged with protecting Australians from racism, but for eight months, since 7 October, the commission has failed to call out antisemitism despite a 738 per cent increase across Australia.

At Senate estimates last week, when asked if she'd specifically referenced antisemitism in relation to the Opera House protests, the President of the Australian Human Rights Commission could only say, 'All of our material refers to the impact on all of the community.' In the past, the commission's rightly made specific statements about negative experiences of Australian Muslims and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians, but not Jews. Although the president's rightly condemned the Russian invasion of Ukraine, she failed to condemn Hamas when repeatedly asked to do so. The commission has repeatedly failed to stand up for Jewish Australians and specifically and singularly call out the antisemitism which has been rife since 7 October.

Has the Attorney spoken to the president or to any commission staff about why the commission has repeatedly failed to call out the rising antisemitism in Australia since 7 October? If so, when did he first speak to the commission? What undertakings, if any, did the commission give about what the commission would do? If he hasn't raised these issues with the commission, why has he not done so?

The phrase 'from the river to the sea' calls for the violent destruction of the State of Israel and the Jewish people. The Prime Minister agrees that it's an extremely violent statement which has no place on our streets. A bipartisan motion in the Senate condemned the use of the phrase. So what does the Attorney-General say to his new Race Discrimination Commissioner, who, at Senate estimates last week, failed to condemn the phrase 'from the river to the sea' and instead said that he'd have to look at the context?

There is systemic racism against Jews at the commission, as evidenced by the statements of their staff and actions of their contractors. This includes the head of Hue Consulting, who was engaged to prepare antiracism material but was involved in the doxxing of 600 Jewish creatives and publicly urged her followers to 'let these effing Zionists know no effing peace'. It was the commission's lawyer who publicly stated that Jewish people as a group are not entitled to cultural safety and suggested the terrorist attacks of 7 October could make sense. Referring to Jewish people, another staff member wrote: 'What are they without Zionism? If we take that away—their violence, their toxicity, their racism—what's left of them as a people?' Then there was the call by commission staff, in relation to the terrorist attacks, to acknowledge Israel's occupation of Palestine as the source of the violence and embed an acknowledgement of Israel's apartheid, occupation and genocide in all communications regarding this matter from the commission.

Has the Attorney expressed concern to the commission about the apparent systemic racism against Jewish people among their staff and contractors? Has he spoken to the commission about their employment and contracting policies to ensure those engaged by the commission are not biased against Jewish Australians? Has the Attorney asked the commission to undertake an audit of its staff and contractors to establish whether any other staff or contractors have engaged in acts of racism against Jewish Australians?

The government's policy is to have the commission undertake a two-year inquiry into racism on campus, which includes racism against First Nations people, antisemitism and Islamophobia. Does the Attorney believe the level of campus antisemitism is not significant enough to have its own standalone inquiry?

Given the problems of campus antisemitism before October 7 identified by the Australian Jewish students' survey, including that 64 per cent of Australian Jewish university students experienced antisemitism on campus and 19 per cent stayed away because of antisemitism, and given the massive increase in antisemitism on campus has included Jewish students being spat on and taunted with swastikas, the office of Jewish staff members being urinated on, academics saying Jews don't deserve cultural safety, academics denying the rapes of October 7, the failure of university leaders—

A division having been called in the House of Representatives—

The failure of university leaders to deal properly with antisemitism includes dealing with encampments, vice-chancellors implying that hate-fuelled protests are just the price Jewish students have to pay for free speech and a collective statement from 39 university chancellors which was so weak it didn't even mention the words 'Jew' or 'antisemitism'.

Given all of this—given failure of the commission president to call out antisemitism and condemn Hamas, given the Race Discrimination Commissioner could not condemn 'from the river to the sea', given the systemic racism of its staff and contractors—does the Attorney believe the commission is really the appropriate body to undertake an inquiry into antisemitism on campus? Or does he agree with the opposition, the non-Green crossbenchers and almost every Jewish organisation in the country that only a judicial inquiry into antisemitism on campus can deal with this matter properly?

See this speech in context