Zoe Daniel (Goldstein, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

With what remains of the hospitals full of limbless children, malnutrition setting in and Gaza in ruins, it's a humanitarian catastrophe. This is not an opinion or politics; this is reality. It's also a fact that the terrorist group Hamas continues to hold Israeli hostages in captivity. Their families have endured months of hell, and the impact of October 7 has given rise to real and deep seated fear among Jewish people across the world, including here in Australia, with a huge spike in antisemitic abuse. This is also not opinion or politics; this is reality. The twin pain of these two groups of people co-exists. One does not cancel out the other. Shouting at each other in this place does not cancel out the pain either but it does inflame and is dangerous, and we have to get back to reason.

This is not a political conversation—or it should not be. And for no-one in this place should it be about votes. To be clear: me standing here saying this, given the community that I represent, reflects zero political advantage. But I must say this: I would strongly argue that just as the Australian government exerts pressure on Hamas for Israeli hostages to be released in this terrible war, the same pressure must be brought on the Netanyahu government to end its offensive. It is self-evident that the fundamental rule to protect civilians is not being followed; this is undeniable. In seeking to dismantle Hamas in response to 7 October, the government of Israel must not risk dismantling its standing in the world. The only reasonable course of action is ceasefire and negotiations for immediate and sustained peace. The challenge, given the historic intractability of this conflict, is to focus on the now. Any conversation about this must be underpinned with the understanding that conflict between these two parties is longstanding. Many have come before us attempting to solve it and have failed. Protests are understandable, but they won't fix it—nor will hurling abuse.

In recent months we've seen inflammatory motions designed to wedge for political reasons rather than to promote a reasoned debate. But I ask today: if not peace negotiations in line with this motion, then what? Really, what? Worsening war? A widening regional conflict? World War III? I will not sit here and not speak up only to have to send Australia's sons and daughters—my own 17-year-old son, perhaps—to war next year or the year after. I will not sit without speaking, because that is the serious precipice on which we stand.

I strongly support Palestinian statehood under the auspices of a peace process leading to a two-state solution. In that, this moment is an opportunity for the Palestinian Authority, for example, to step up and show that it can reinvent itself to lead. To be clear, my concern is also for Israel and its people. A safe and secure future of the Israelis and the Palestinians is intertwined. Israel will not be truly safe until Palestine is also free. If only we could all have that clear-headed conversation about how we get there, rather than hurling abuse at each other inside and outside this chamber.

As I stand here today, I sense a pivotal moment in our history as a nation and as a world. Such times are deserving of reasoned, careful words and actions. Life and death must not be weaponised for political gain within the people's House or outside it. I support reason. I offer what I've just said with empathy to those in my own community who are struggling with deep anxiety and fear. But I have my eyes fixed on the future—that is, peace for two groups of people. This must be the aspiration of us all. A two-state solution is the only way through. I support this motion.

See this speech in context