Maria Vamvakinou (Calwell, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

(1) notes that as of 1977, the United Nations made 29 November the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People;

(2) recognises 2014 as the United Nations International Year of Solidarity with the Palestinian People (IYSPP); and

(3) acknowledges the objective of the IYSPP was to promote solidarity with the Palestinian people as a central theme, contributing to international awareness of:

(a) core themes regarding the Question of Palestine, as prioritised by the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People;

(b) obstacles to the ongoing peace process, particularly those requiring urgent action such as settlements, Jerusalem, the blockade of Gaza and the humanitarian situation in the occupied Palestinian territory, and;

(c) mobilisation of global action towards the achievement of a comprehensive, just and lasting solution of the Question of Palestine in accordance with international law and the relevant resolutions of the United Nations.

In moving this motion, I want to first acknowledge that in 1977 the United Nations declared 29 November the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People. I also want to acknowledge that 2014 has been declared as the United Nations Year of Solidarity with the Palestinian People.

I want to remind the House that it has been 67 years since the partition of Palestine and the occupation, which continues until today—an occupation that is devastating, demoralising and damaging for all involved. The time has now come for this to end. Australia, and indeed this parliament, must now recognise the state of Palestine. Australia must vote yes at the UN for Palestinian Statehood. Fifty six per cent of Australians are in favour of this and 135 countries have already done so.

In his message for the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon affirmed that:

We have passed through another sombre, sad and sorry year for Palestinians, Israelis and all who seek peace. Over the course of 50 brutal days this summer, the world witnessed a ruthless war in Gaza — the third such conflict in six years.

He goes on to remind us:

An end of the conflict will only come through a negotiated and just political solution, based on the relevant United Nations resolutions.

He says further:

The Israeli and Palestinian people face a shared fate on shared land. There is no erasing the other. Yet I fear deeply that with each passing day the people of the region are losing any sense of connection — any sense of empathy — any sense of mutual understanding of our common humanity and common future.

He ends by calling on all parties, on this International Day of Solidarity:

… to step back from the brink. The mindless cycle of destruction must end. The virtuous circle of peace must begin.

In reiterating and echoing the UN Secretary-General's statements and sentiments, I want to stress that while the Palestinian conflict remains unresolved, marred in injustice, stained by oppression and steeped in despair, the politics of violence will always prevail.

Violence will beget violence and radicalisation, with more intifadas, suicide bombings and rockets rendering peace in the Middle East an ever-dwindling prospect. While this conflict continues to be trapped within the walls that enclave and entrap the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, its lasting, peaceful and just solution is just as trapped. While roadmaps to peace are blocked by intransigence and invasive unlawful settlements, there will be no peace not just for the Palestinians and the Israelis, the Middle East, the Arab and Muslim world and the Jewish diaspora but also for the rest of us in the world. Such is the passion, fury and the desperation that this conflict evokes, that even here in Australia, it has lent itself as a cause d'armes for misplaced and misunderstood radicalisation.

In 2011 I led a Parliamentary Friends of Palestine delegation to the region. We met with Dr Yossi Beilin, a leading Israeli political figure, who played an active role in the peace process during the time of former Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. He indicated to us then that the progressive voices for peace in Israel were disappearing. Today it appears they have all but disappeared. As a consequence, the politics of desperation, cynicism and fear have garnered a political class that is hard, intransigent and unimaginative. In Israel today a dangerous, conservative sentiment prevails that is encapsulated by a foreign minister who will never accept a Palestinian state, a housing minister who intends to rebuild a temple on the site of the Al-Aqsa Mosque, Israeli parliamentarians who join settlers praying in the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound and a Prime Minister that is leading his country and his people on a path where there are no real or genuine prospects for peace.

Last month, former Israeli President and Nobel Laureate, Shimon Peres, speaking on the 19th anniversary of the Yitzhak Rabin assassination, criticised Prime Minister Netanyahu's government for failing to make peace and declared: 'Those who have renounced making peace are not patriots.' He bemoaned: 'It's a shame that the only peace initiative was an Arab initiative.' Shimon Peres wondered, 'Where is the Israeli peace initiative?' and he warned that 'time is against us'.

On this day we need to go beyond simply urging both sides to come to the peace table. We need to demand, for the sake of peace and stability in the region and indeed the world, that all sides sit down and bring closure to this issue based on justice and international law. Finally on this day we need to acknowledge and understand that the prospects for a two-state solution are increasingly dissipating and we are left with very few options. We are potentially embarking on a road map that leads to nowhere. (Time expired)

Ian Goodenough (Moore, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Craig Laundy (Reid, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.

Russell Broadbent (McMillan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is actually sad to stand here today having heard the previous member's address, which did not really hold out a lot of hope. Hope is our future. Hope is our present—hope for peace. The member reminded us that there are those of the Jewish faith who are still seeking peace—progressives for peace. But what were the words? They were: 'Peace—an ever-dwindling prospect.'

The world is in a state of fear that even resonates in this nation. There is not mutual understanding. In fact, there is not understanding that we can even think to grasp here in Australia, where we are free, where we can have an election, like yesterday, without fear or favour or threat of challenge or violence—even though everybody says the world is going to end if this party gets in or that party gets in—and where our children do not go without food, they do not live under threat, they do not go to school under threat, they are able to travel across borders with ease and they are not threatened at border posts.

Through the offices of this parliament, I have had the great, enlightening experience of going to the Middle East on two occasions. The first occasion was to look at the peace process in the Middle East in 1990. Nothing has changed since 1990. In fact, the situation seems to be far more intractable today—the fear, the divisions greater and the conflict greater and more repetitious. What did Ban Ki-moon say? Three major events in a short time. The threat is that there will be another major event shortly unless somebody comes to the table and says, 'This cannot happen.'

We do not understand the Israelis' fear of their borders being under attack from every side. We do not understand that. We do not live that life. We did not live under threat. But I should remind the House that, in my experience, on each occasion when this federal parliament has been represented in the Middle East we did not go and speak just with the Israelis or just get the Israelis' point of view. We always went to the Palestinians at the highest levels and spoke to them about the situation they were in—only to find by the time we arrived back in this country another issue had flared.

It is right that members of parliament in this place take an interest in human rights across the board, and they have. I have heard the responses. I understand the motion. What I do not understand is where we go from here. What is the pathway? What is the opportunity? I, personally, with all my discussions with the Friends of Palestine in this place and with the Israelis, do not have a response to give the parliament. I do not understand why, when a child gets in trouble, their family's house gets torn down. I have no concept of that.

But where Australia can play a role is that we can at least be interested. I hope as a nation we are able to use our good offices on every occasion with a view towards peace and not a view towards conflict. I reiterate that I am closely aligned with the state of Israel and will remain so. I believe that they have a right to exist and I will protect that right. On the other hand, I understand the pain of my fellow Christians in Palestine and all others in Palestine. I personally look forward to the resolution of the matters at the earliest time.

Melissa Parke (Fremantle, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Health) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Calwell for bringing this motion forward. I am grateful to have the opportunity to speak on the occasion of the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People. This motion is particularly pertinent at a time when Israel is facing severe internal and external criticism for its proposed 'Jewish state law', which will entrench apartheid in that state. It is also pertinent when there are clear signs that the international community is no longer prepared to accept empty platitudes of support for a two-state solution accompanied by unconvincing attempts at peace negotiations while the Israeli government continues to create more 'facts on the ground' in the form of settlements.

Sweden recently joined the 135 states that already recognise the state of Palestine. The UK and Spanish parliaments have passed resolutions in favour of a Palestinian state. There is clearly overwhelming international support for a Palestinian state, yet a just solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict remains elusive.

My core proposition is that finding a just solution to the conflict is not a contest between pro-Israelis and pro-Palestinians. It is in fact about seeking a lasting resolution based on international law. The question then is: what does a just solution look like and how may it be achieved? In this context, it is important that the conflict between Palestine and Israel not be overcomplicated or mystified by reference to religious wars, a clash of civilizations or ancient enmities. The truth is that the Israel-Palestine conflict is not a complex problem.

Everyone knows that the final status questions are borders, Jerusalem, settlements and refugees. Thanks to the 2004 advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice, we know what international law says about all these questions. The ICJ, the highest court in the world, also known as the World Court, went through all the final status issues. The World Court said:

No territorial acquisition resulting from the threat or use of force shall be recognized as legal.

It also said:

… the principle of self-determination of peoples has been enshrined in the United Nations Charter and reaffirmed by the General Assembly …

It follows that the Palestinian people, whose existence the court said is no longer an issue, are entitled to the right to self-determination. Palestine's right to self-determination is not in international law subject to any performance criteria stipulated by Israel. No other oppressed people have had their right to self-determination made conditional on the preferences of the occupier.

The World Court found that the separation wall Israel built had been constructed in such a way as to include within it the great majority of the Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem. The World Court said that all Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, had been established in breach of international law. Here is where the role of international solidarity becomes important. It is to help turn a legal victory into a political victory. It is to help convert a legal consensus into a political consensus.

When the foreign secretary of the United Kingdom, Arthur Balfour, wrote a letter to Walter Rothschild, a leader of the British Jewish community, in 1917 expressing support for the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, this document—somewhat grandly named the 'Balfour Declaration'—came to be regarded as doctrine wherever the question of Palestine was being discussed, and it was used as an instrument to legitimise the establishment of the state of Israel. Unfortunately, the important qualifying statement in the Balfour Declaration, 'it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine', is usually omitted whenever the declaration is referred to.

When the UN Resolution 181 partitioning Palestine was voted upon, the foreign minister of Israel, Abba Eban, referred to it as Israel's birth certificate. Like the Balfour declaration, it was raised everywhere the question of Palestine was being discussed. But Palestine has its birth certificate too, the 2004 opinion by the International Court of Justice. The ICJ judgment confers legitimacy on Palestine, and yet how often do we hear this opinion mentioned compared to, say, the Balfour Declaration and the partition resolution?

It is critical that we read, explain and publicise the ICJ opinion at every opportunity. Every year the UN General Assembly passes resolutions affirming Palestine's right to self-determination, and today the UN is much more representative of the world's peoples than it was back in 1947—decolonisation and independence struggles have seen to that, thankfully. The majority of the world's countries support a two-state solution, compensation for land, a right of return, East Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine and the illegality of Israeli settlements under international law. These resolutions—which are also birth certificates for Palestine—go to the core issue, which, as I have said, is not about taking sides in a contest too often overloaded with irrelevant cultural and historical baggage or sidetracked by violence on both sides but is in fact about what is right under the rule of law by which all countries should abide.

The World Court and the UN General Assembly have clearly outlined the principles for resolving the conflict. Solidarity with Palestine means educating and organising along these lines.

Craig Laundy (Reid, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today both to second the motion that the member for Calwell has brought to the chamber and to speak in favour of it. My predecessor spoke about going to Palestine. I have not had the opportunity to go to Palestine, but in a weird twist of events in the electorate I represent I did not have to, because people of Palestine came to me. I have lived in my part of Sydney my entire life, and in fact I am the third generation of my family to do that. Being Catholic you are cursed, I think, with leaning right on values and leaning very left on social justice. If you were to talk about this topic in my electorate, this is one that resonates. It is the social justice side of this that particularly resonates with me. I learn better by immersion and, after I was elected, the member for Calwell contacted me, I guess on a hunch that the demographics of my electorate would have over time given me exposure to this cause—and I am very thankful she did that. What I did do once I agreed to be the co-chair of the Friends of Palestine was that, because I am a simple character that learns better by immersion, I contacted friends of the member for Calwell and I asked to basically go and sit and listen, as I learn a lot better when I listen. I went one step further. It was a Saturday afternoon in Auburn and around 50 or 60 people had gathered together. I took my wife and my two daughters with me to spend an afternoon with some truly amazing people and to listen to their stories.

We hear the constant referral to the two-state solution; both parties refer to it. But I am as frustrated as the previous speakers are on this topic, because quite often I believe this is used as a line to hide behind; it does not get past that. The sole motivation of everyone in this place is to make this country and this world a better place for our kids—and to do so, this is an issue we need to attack; we need to be real about it. I have great faith in the hearts of Australians—I always have had and I always will have. A slang term that we use is the 'fair go'. For the last almost 60 years, the people of Palestine have not had a fair go. What my wife and daughters and I heard that afternoon over three hours was story after story from first generation and second generation Palestinians. We heard about the impact that the situation in Palestine has had on the parents. Imagine, if you will, going home this afternoon and going to put your key in the door and it doesn't fit. You think, 'Hang on a minute. What's happened here?' You knock on the door, and someone that you do not know opens the door. They are in your home. That is what happened in Palestine. That is what happened all those years ago. A people were displaced and they have been fighting for their identity every since. That is it simply. If you look at the Middle East and the issues that we as a globe confront today, we can trace it pretty much back to this region some 60 or 70 years ago. Anyone who stands in this place and argues differently is not being fair dinkum.

We got back in the car after three hours. I am blessed with three beautiful children, and all of them, fortunately, look like and take after their mum. In the safety of our own car, where we could voice our opinions and talk amongst ourselves about this issue, my middle daughter, my 15-year-old daughter, Sophie, said from the back seat, 'Dad, you've got to do something to help.' You cannot listen to the stories of people who were directly impacted on this front and not come away with any other desire than to help—and to do that we must be fair dinkum. We must take our soft diplomatic voice through both the UN and the halls of these chambers. The things discussed in this chamber should not be influenced by the power of the lobby; they should be influenced by what is right.

Member for Calwell, in the Year of Solidarity with the Palestinian People—many of whom call my electorate home—what you propose here is right. I will stand side by side with you at all times on this issue. I will debate this topic and yell for change—because the definition of insanity is doing the same thing every day and hoping for a different solution.

Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I agree wholeheartedly with the member for Reid when he says that to be a member of this parliament and do nothing is wrong. We were elected to this parliament to make our country and the world a better place. We have allowed the situation in Palestine, in the Middle East, to continue since 1949, and it is unacceptable.

The International Year of Solidarity with the Palestinian People is about promoting solidarity; it is about saying that what is happening in Palestine, what is happening in the Middle East, is wrong and that we have got to bring about a change. In 2011, I visited Palestine with the member for Calwell and the member for Fremantle. What I experienced there was not what I thought I was going to experience. It was something which I was not prepared for. It was something that I did not know existed in that form. Prior to my visit, I did not quite understand what 'occupation' meant. It was not until I saw the separation wall, until I learned of the difficulties faced by the Palestinian people each and every day of their lives and until I learned of the barriers that were put in place of these people by the bureaucracy that I understood. And, of course, until I visited Palestine I did not really understand what the settlements were. I did not know about the housing demolitions that have created so much angst amongst the Palestinian people.

I visited Gaza, and my visit to Gaza was life changing. The Gaza people have had three conflicts within the last six years. Each and every day of their life is a struggle for their existence. I visited UN schools in Gaza and I listened to young people. I listened to how human rights have been incorporated into the curriculum. I learnt how important it was for the human rights of people to be respected and about the impact that the occupation has had in Palestine.

It is imperative that the Middle East conflict comes to an end. Until peace—and lasting peace—has been reached in the Middle East, it will have an enormous impact on the world. Not only will peace benefit Palestine but it will also benefit the Israeli people.

A two-state solution is one that provides respect to both parties. I do not know how we can stand in this parliament, deny the right for the Palestinian people to exist and just give lip-service to the fact that we support a two-party solution, yet, at every opportunity that we have as a nation, we stand up and vote against that happening. We put in place barrier after barrier. We show no support for reaching that solution. As the member for Reid said in this place, how can we in all conscience allow this to continue? I cannot. I cannot stand here and argue that what is happening in Palestine is the right thing. I cannot argue that the blockade should continue in Jerusalem, where sick people are denied access to medical treatment. I cannot support a situation where the lives of people living in Jerusalem are subjected to the worst sort of apartheid. I cannot under any circumstance support the continuation of the settlements.

The UK and the Spanish parliaments, as the member for Fremantle stated in her contribution, have stated their support for Palestine. I think it is time for us, as a parliament, to stand up and put on record our support for the Palestinian people and our real support for a two-party solution.

Kelly O'Dwyer (Higgins, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Acting Deputy Speaker—

Don Randall (Canning, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, we are all Deputy Speaker.

Kelly O'Dwyer (Higgins, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Deputy Speaker, I apologise.

Don Randall (Canning, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We are all Deputy Speaker; there is no-one acting.

Kelly O'Dwyer (Higgins, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Okay. This debate comes at a worrying time in the Middle East, as we hope for a peaceful agreement between Israel, the Palestinian people and the wider Arab states. There are justifiable pronouncements that we are witnessing the start of a third Palestinian intifada. I was horrified by the recent mutilation of five Israelis, including a Druze policeman, who were butchered in the recent attack on a synagogue in Jerusalem. This follows the hostilities over our winter between Israel and Hamas. The hostilities saw Hamas terrorising the citizens of Israel through their bombardment of towns and cities. Innocent adults and children were killed and maimed on both sides as a result of Hamas purposefully firing from civilian areas and even United Nations schools and hospitals.

Despite 20 years of attempts to reach a final status solution between Israel and the Palestinian people, the Australian government continues to call on all parties to work through negotiations to achieve a peaceful and secure solution for all Israelis and the Palestinians. I respect Ms Vamvakinou, and I believe that she is very sincere in aiming for a true and peaceful solution. But it is my view that this motion does not achieve that.

The twenty-ninth day of November should really be a happy day for the entire region. If we go back in history, 29 November 1947 was the day that the United Nations voted for the petition plan recognising both the future state of Israel and a Palestinian-Arab state. While Israel accepted the proposal, the Arab nations refused to accept any proposal that recognised a Jewish-Israeli state and then went to war with all that followed.

In order to achieve peace, we need to encourage both sides to take positive steps that can achieve peace for all. I am fortunate that I have visited Israel twice, and I have seen how Israel is trying to achieve this. I have also visited the city of Ramallah on two separate occasions. During my time visiting Israel I saw a united Jerusalem where, since 1967, all religions have been able to live in the city and visit their holy sites safely and peacefully—a situation that was not the case prior to that date. I saw a successful, democratic country where all citizens were treated equally. There were Arab members of the Israeli Knesset, Palestinians attending Israeli universities and the wounded from Syria being treated in Israeli hospitals. I saw a place where women are treated equally. I saw a place where sexuality does not define you and where gay people can live their lives knowing that they are protected by the law. I also know that most Israeli politicians, including Israel's Prime Minister Netanyahu, appreciate a Palestinian state.

On the issue of a blockade of Gaza, it is my view that the facts do not align with an idea that there is somehow a medical and food aid blockade. This is simply not the case. Medical and food aid continue to be allowed by Israel into Gaza. Even the granddaughter of Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh was transferred from Gaza to an Israeli hospital for treatment this year. However, over the years, Hamas has also imported into Gaza building materials which were then used to build terror tunnels to attack Israeli citizens rather than to build homes and schools for their residents.

I am very concerned about the way in which Israel and the Jewish people are portrayed in Palestinian schools and on television shows—an education which encourages continued hatred and denial of Israel's very right to exist. It is my view that the continued hatred of Israel, encouraged by the Palestinian leadership, is one of the real obstacles to the ongoing peace process. I do not believe, though, that this represents the true nature of the Palestinian people. Peace in the Middle East will only be achieved by all the parties negotiating a mutually equitable outcome. I continue to call on all parties to show restraint and hope that Israelis and the Palestinians can live in peace and security through a negotiated two-state solution.

Debate adjourned.