Bob Katter (Kennedy, Katter's Australian Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the following:

(1) the Member for Kennedy moving:

That this House:

(a) expresses its strong support for the people of Israel who, on 7 October 2023, were subjected to an appalling and unprovoked terrorist invasion and attack upon Israel; and

(b) calls on the Parliament of Australia to condemn the terrorist organisation Hamas and demand that the people responsible for the invasion of Israel and consequent war release the hostages taken in this invasion;

(2) debate on the motion being limited to the mover, seconder and two other members;

(3) amendments to the motion not being permitted; and

(4) any variation to the arrangement being made only on a motion moved by a Minister.

Question agreed to, with an absolute majority.

I move:

That this House:

(1) expresses its strong support for the people of Israel who, on 7 October 2023, were subjected to an appalling and unprovoked terrorist invasion and attack upon Israel; and

(2) calls on the Parliament of Australia to condemn the terrorist organisation Hamas and demand that the people responsible for the invasion of Israel and consequent war release the hostages taken in this invasion.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Government Services and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.

Bob Katter (Kennedy, Katter's Australian Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm afraid that some of my colleagues in the crossbench got up and I interpreted their speeches as supporting Hamas and veritably saying that the invasion was justified. Firstly, if you say that the Israelis invaded that country and took it over, I don't think many people on the planet would say that the Jews returning to Israel is someone taking someone else's country off them. Secondly, if that's your principle, then you Europeans roll your swag, go back to where you came from and give the country back to we blackfellas, I'd suggest, if you want to be consistent. If you say there was an invasion and you took our country off us, well, you Europeans go back to where you came from. That would be my answer to that argument.

Here is an article with photos on it: 'Why Egypt and other Arab countries are unwilling to take in Palestinian refugees from Gaza'. These people say, 'It's unfair that Israel is not taking us back into Israel.' Well, no other Arab country is going to take you either. There's got to be a reason why all these aggressive Arab countries whose governments have all passed resolutions to destroy the State of Israel won't have any of the Gazans come into their country. There must be a reason here. If you say, 'Oh, the naughty Israelis are retaliating,' well, when you fire a bomb, it doesn't have a name on it, and when it explodes it kills people. You picked the war—you started the war—so don't come blaming everyone else when you reap the whirlwind. You sowed the seeds, and now you reap the whirlwind.

Now, let it be a message to every other country on Earth that what Russia is doing and getting away with in Ukraine is because of the very dangerous weakness of the European countries. But at least in Israel they have sent the message, 'If you invade our country and hurt our people then we will retaliate.' No country can defend themselves without having that principle. So there was a retaliation. You started the war; now you will have to live with the war.

Having said that, there are still hundreds of hostages being held by Hamas. Are you entitled to go after the people that took those hostages, that raped and brutally murdered 1,200 people, and then advertised it on the television? You could say, 'At least the Germans had the decency to try and hide what they were doing to the Jews.'

As Australians, we have traditionally stood up for the underdog, the persecuted minority group. I am very proud, as an Australian, that we have had that reputation. If ever there were a persecuted underdog throughout history, it would be the people that adhere to the Judaic religion. I cannot fathom how or why, and people say, 'Jesus was crucified.' Well, hold on a minute. Jesus was not only a Jew but also a rabbi that preached in temples. That would hardly be logical there—in fact, just the opposite.

There is a principle involved here that, if you invade somebody else's country, you must expect retaliation and that other nations might help in that retaliation, because we don't want people just walking around invading other countries and starting wars. The Israeli people are surrounded by some 700 million Islamic people. I want to make a point here that it's not about the Islamic religion as such, because I've had great interface with Indonesia over the years through the cattle industry and in various other ways. I have found them to be a very good and decent people. They have been wonderful neighbours to us, and they are a Muslim country. But there is a big difference between how it is practised there and how it is practised in certain Middle Eastern countries.

If we are letting people into this country, surely there should be criteria. Are they coming from a democracy? Are they coming from a country with a rule of law? Are they coming from a country with Christianity or some similar belief like the Sikhs: love your neighbour, be humble, make the world a better place? Do they have that sort of philosophy and commitment? Do they have egalitarian traditions? The vast bulk of the people who come to this country—no, no, no, no, no, no. Over 850 people have come in from Gaza or have got permits to come into this country from Gaza since that invasion and murder of 1,200 people took place. No Muslim country and no Arab country will take them. Why is Australia taking them? That is a big question for the ALP to answer.

We know the answer to that. It's because so many of their branches are controlled by these people coming in from the Middle East. Let me state very clearly that I have been told by the best of authority—and I hope that the ALP side of this parliament can prove I'm wrong—that the mosques in Sydney control the ALP in Sydney and Sydney ALP controls Australian ALP. I hope that you can convince me that I'm wrong. But, if you are allowing 850 people in from Gaza and no-one else in the world will take them, you've got to ask a question: why is the ALP—and I say the ALP here, not the government—taking these people?

I'll make another point here. Antisemitism: if the people in Europe had stood up aggressively against this pernicious and dreadful sectarian hatred in the early 1930s, the terrible catastrophe of the Second World War would not have occurred. The worst murder in human history, mass murder on racial lines, would never have taken place if they had stood up aggressively right at the start. If more people had joined Pastor Niemoller in his courageous stand against the Nazis and if more people had backed people like von Stauffenberg then it wouldn't have happened.

We have here an embryonic anti-Semitism coming from elements of the crossbench. They're anti-Semitic. Don't muck around: they hate the Jews. If you watched the television of that mob in Sydney, they were chanting—I saw it with my own eyes and heard it and I replayed it later on the evening; I turned on again to watch it again—they were chanting, 'Gas the Jews.' They're weren't saying 'Gas the Israelis.' The were saying 'Gas the Jews.' It was racial. Not one single one of those people were stopped from chanting, advocating the murder of people. Not one single person was stopped from doing that. Not one single one of them was apprehended. Not one single one of them was sent back to where they came from. Nothing.

You've got to ask the question, why did the ALP government of New South Wales do nothing? Why did the ALP government in this place do nothing? Absolutely nothing. Ask yourself this question: if those people had been chanting anti-Muslim chants, what do you reckon would have happened?

We have anti-Semitism here, and it needs to be stamped out and stamped out with aggression. It is hateful and it is completely opposite to what every decent Australia believes in. If ever there is an underdog, a tiny little country of 3½ million people surrounded by 600 or 700 million people, all committed to the destruction of their country—and if you say they shouldn't have been there because the Gazans really own that country, hold on a minute. What would you have done? Six million of you persecuted, and to the shame of my country, the ship of shame that went all around the world. Brazil wouldn't take them; the United States wouldn't take them; no European country would take them. They came to Australia, these Jewish people escaping the Nazis, and we wouldn't take them, these poor people. So where were they going to go to escape to massacre that was occurring? Who can blame them for going back to their homeland? It's called Israel and they are called Jews. Why are they called Jews? Because they come from Jerusalem, which is the capital of Palestine, Israel, whatever you want to call it.

If we start adopting a principle that some other group of people were there originally, I have some Britons in my family tree, so you Anglo-Saxons go home to England. You Norman French go home to France. And I will say we British copped it. We can't turn the clock back, and we want to live in harmony with each other. If somebody invades another country, like Russia has done or the Hamas invasion of Israel, the Russians haven't systematically murdered the people. It's terrible what they have done, but they didn't systematically murder the people and then put the murder and rape on the television, promoting their murder and rape on the television. And that people in the parliament of Australia could have got away with what they got away with two nights ago, it was a disgrace and a reflection on every person in this parliament.

I have great pride being an Australian. Someone should be holding up the Australian flag. My family lost a son in the first World War and in the World War II. We went out west in a stagecoach there when the terrible Kalkadoon wars were still raging. We have a reputation for being involved in public life and making things a bit better for everybody. So who else should stand up? It should be me. I think there are a whole lot of people in this place that should be standing up as well. We as Australians will not accept racial hatred. And we will not condemn people for trying to stay alive and protect themselves. There's a great saying: if you want peace, prepare for war. Yes, that's right: if you want peace, prepare for war. So, you send a message out saying that if you attack us, we will hit you back and we will hurt you. My relatives—uncles and father, cousins and everybody on Kokoda, Milne Bay, Aitape and the islands—were telling the Japanese, 'You tried to invade our country and, mate, you're gonna pay for it.' We did everything humanly possible to see that they did pay for it. The message we sent out is, 'Don't touch my country.' The Israelis, surely, are entitled to the same attitude.

You know, we want peace. My great sorrow is that my generation have left my country. If you want peace, prepare for war. Well, we're not prepared for war. Our defences are a bloody joke. They're really just a joke. I'll give you one simple example. When I was put in uniform and was on my way to Indonesia—we were at war with Indonesia—we had one and a half million combat rifles. You don't pick a fight with a country with one and a half million combat rifles. Half a million were in the hands of the army and a million were in private hands. My family had three or four, I think, if my memory serves me correctly. Now we have 36,000! Not one and a half million: 36,000 little rifles with which to defend the country! There are virtually no artillery shells. They spent $40,000 million buying 15 patrol boats that have got one machine gun on them. That's $40,000 million for patrol boats and for drones with no ordnance whatsoever, except 15 machine guns. My platoon of 32 men in the 49th Battalion had 16 or 17 machine guns and we cost the Australian people $20,000. But this government—and the last government; you blokes are just as guilty as this mob—spent $40,000 million to buy 15 machine guns. I mean— Time expired.

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Government Services and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was pleased to second the motion moved by the member for Kennedy, which expresses strong support for the people of Israel and calls on the Parliament of Australia to condemn the terrorist organisation Hamas, and demand that the people responsible for the invasion of Israel and the consequent war—namely, Hamas—release the hostages taken in this invasion.

I want to congratulate the member for Kennedy for expressing a strong, clear, moral position. It is a position that the coalition is very much in support of and that is very consistent with what we have said ever since the appalling, unprovoked terrorist attack that occurred on 7 October in Israel.

This is a motion which supports the nation and the people of Israel. This is a motion which supports the Jewish people. One of the reasons that the member for Kennedy was moved to take this action, which the coalition is pleased to support, was to respond to the appalling motion that was moved by the member for Melbourne and the Greens party this morning—a motion which purported to deal with these matters but which, extraordinarily, made no mention of Hamas, the murderous terrorist organisation which controls Gaza. It made no mention of the appalling, unprovoked attack on 7 October, in which at least 1,100 men, women and children were killed—in the main, civilians. As has, horrifyingly, been documented and demonstrated, not only were over 1,100 people killed but we saw depraved, horrific violence, including sexual violence and deliberate harm being done to young children. This was an attack on civilisation, an attack on fundamental human values and, of course, very deliberately an attack on the Jewish people. That such violence should be visited upon Jewish people is a chilling reminder of the evils of the Holocaust. Once again, Jewish people have been killed and injured specifically because of hatred for their religion, and any statement in relation to the conflict presently occurring which is silent as to the actions which triggered and initiated this conflict is a fundamentally misleading statement. That, sadly, is what the Greens Party attempted to do this morning. The member for Kennedy has responded in the fashion he has, and the coalition is pleased to support him.

The fact is that there are still at least 100 people who were taken hostage in that attack—children, elderly people, and civilians, largely—who remain imprisoned in the most horrific circumstances in Gaza. They're being held within the enormous network of tunnels that extends, we now know, throughout Gaza. They're being held in facilities which are, sadly, it appears, often located directly under hospitals. This is one of the hallmarks of the way that this murderous terrorist organisation, Hamas, operates. Not only are they using Jewish people—Israelis—as human shields but they're also using Palestinian civilians as human shields. The moral depravity of the actions of Hamas deserve enormous and unreserved condemnation.

The simple fact is that what all fair-minded observers want to see is a lasting peace. But at the same time, the proposition that the state of Israel—the democratic nation of Israel—should be exposed to this vicious attack—this attack without warning—which killed and injured so many people, the majority of them civilians, and that it ought to be in some way condemned or criticised because it has taken actions to defend itself and its people, to restore order and, very importantly, to deny Hamas the capacity to engage in such vicious attacks in the future—the proposition that this conduct should be condemned, which is what the Australian Greens are putting, is a proposition that on this side of the House we very strongly disagree with.

There are so many aspects of what has happened here that are an appalling tragedy. One of the aspects of this which is absolutely appalling is that the these violent terrorist attacks by Hamas have, in fact, grievously set back progress towards the lasting peace that all of us want to see. They have grievously set back that process.

The motion that is before the House today is clear and it is straightforward and it is based upon fundamental moral principles. It expresses support for a people and a nation who were the victims of an appalling and unprovoked terrorist invasion and attack, and that is something that, ordinarily, would be completely uncontroversial and would be absolutely the first instinct of any nation and any person observing what had occurred. It is deeply troubling that there are some who seem to find it difficult to express that support, that basic human reaction of sympathy and solidarity.

The second thing this motion rightly does is to condemn the terrorist organisation Hamas—the organisation which is responsible for what happened here; the organisation which took the decision to mount this appalling and unprovoked attack; the organisation whose activists, soldiers and terrorists carried out the horrifically violent attacks on innocent people that we have learnt so much about since those attacks occurred. It expresses a condemnation of that organisation and the values that it stands for, and it expresses a clear and straightforward demand: Hamas was responsible for this invasion, and for the consequent war, and they must release the hostages who were taken in this invasion. It is a clear, straightforward motion, based on fundamental moral principles, and the coalition is very pleased to be seconding this motion.

Tim Watts (Gellibrand, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise for the second time today to speak on a motion before this chamber on the conflict in the Middle East, and I recommend my earlier speech to all members of the House. It provided a comprehensive accounting of the way that the Albanese Labor government has sought to navigate this consequential and complex conflict.

Let me say that there is much in the member for Kennedy's speech that I disagree with, but I will take the text of the member's motion in good faith. We agree with the text of the motion moved by the member for Kennedy, but I should make clear that, were we to have drafted this motion, the motion would have taken a broader lens—and, indeed, we did, when this parliament passed a motion in October last year, almost unanimously. I want to go back to 16 October to reflect on that motion, because I think it set a very solid foundation for the way that we as a government, but also we as a chamber and we as a nation, have sought to respond to the appalling terrorist attacks of 7 October and the conflict that has followed. So let me just read out that 16 October motion. It reflects the motion before the House now. It said:

That the House—

(1) unequivocally condemns the attacks on Israel by Hamas, which are the heinous acts of terrorists, and have encompassed the targeting and murder of civilians, including women and children, the taking of hostages, and indiscriminate rocket fire;

(2) stands with Israel and recognises its inherent right to defend itself;

(3) condemns antisemitism and recognises that generations of Jewish people have been subjected to this hateful prejudice;

(4) calls for the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages;

(5) recognises that Hamas does not represent the Palestinian people, nor their legitimate needs and aspirations …

These provisions of that motion, nearly unanimously passed by this parliament, reflect the provisions of the motion before the House now. But, as I said, we seek to encompass the full pain being experienced in this conflict in this motion. The motion went on:

(6) acknowledges the devastating loss of Israeli and Palestinian life and that innocent civilians on all sides are suffering as a result of the attacks by Hamas and the subsequent conflict—

That's an important point to note—that the House recognises the suffering of all innocent civilians, all women and children, in this crisis. It went on:

(7) supports justice and freedom for Israelis and Palestinians alike;

(8) supports international efforts to establish and maintain humanitarian access into Gaza, including safe passage for civilians;

(9) reiterates Australia's consistent position in all contexts is to call for the protection of civilian lives and the observance of international law; …

The motion goes on, but I should say that the principles of this motion, passed in the immediate wake of the appalling terrorist attack, have held up well. We have consistently argued for them as a government. And the power of that motion, I think, is strengthened by the unity of support for it across the political divide.

It's important, because Australia is being tested at the moment—the unity of our nation is being tested and our social cohesion is being tested. The kind of nation that I think we all believe we have is being tested. Our ability to treat fellow citizens with respect is being tested in our communities, which is why I was deeply disturbed by the leader of the Greens' characterisation—

Bob Katter (Kennedy, Katter's Australian Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Why did you let people scream out, 'Gas the Jews!'?

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Kennedy, please!

Tim Watts (Gellibrand, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was deeply concerned, earlier this morning, by the Leader of the Greens' characterisation of this motion that I have just read out as, 'When the Labor Party brought a motion to parliament on the eve of a looming invasion to say they backed the invasion, we opposed it.' What a bad faith characterisation! It's an unbecoming characterisation of a motion that was explicitly designed to unite the Australian public behind principles that we can all support. Indeed, the final provisions of that motion in October were:

(15) notes that undermining social cohesion and unity by stoking fear and division risks Australia's domestic security; and

(16) affirms in the strongest possible terms that hateful prejudice has no place in Australia.

It's appalling to characterise that motion as somehow warmongering. Really? The principles in that motion, passed nearly unanimously by this parliament—with the notable exception of the Greens—have held up and been reflected in subsequent joint statements pursued by the Australian government with like-minded nations around the world trying to deal with this complex and difficult issue.

Indeed, on 13 December 2023, Prime Minister Albanese joined with Prime Minister Trudeau of Canada and Prime Minister Luxon of New Zealand in a joint statement by three like-minded prime ministers. It began:

Australia, Canada, and New Zealand mourn every Israeli and Palestinian innocent life which has been lost in this conflict and express our condolences to all families and communities affected by the violence.

Reflecting the motion before the House, it goes on:

We unequivocally condemn Hamas' terror attacks on Israel on October 7, the appalling loss of life, and the heinous acts of violence perpetrated in those attacks, including sexual violence. We condemn Hamas' unacceptable treatment of hostages and call for the immediate and unconditional release of all remaining hostages.

The statement also recognised the extraordinary pain and suffering of the humanitarian crisis we see in Gaza, saying:

We remain deeply concerned by the scale of the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and ongoing risks to all Palestinian civilians. Safe and unimpeded humanitarian access must be increased and sustained.

Importantly, that statement also set the only pathway out of this current conflict, and that is a negotiated settlement between Israel and the Palestinians so that the two peoples can live side-by-side, with internationally recognised borders and in peace and security. It recognised the support by all three prime ministers:

We support Palestinians' right to self-determination. We oppose the forcible displacement of Palestinians from Gaza, the re-occupation of Gaza, any reduction in territory, and any use of siege or blockade. We emphasize that Gaza must no longer be used as a platform for terrorism. We reaffirm that settlements are illegal under international law. Settlements and settler violence are serious obstacles to a negotiated two-state solution.

The reason this is included is that they are obstacles to the negotiated settlement I talked about earlier—the only pathway out of this conflict. It feels like a long way away, but it is the only pathway out.

This statement concludes with a call, in the same way the parliamentary motion concluded, by saying:

We condemn rising antisemitism, Islamophobia, and anti-Arab sentiment in our countries and around the world and remain firmly committed to combatting prejudice, hatred, and violent extremism.

All of us in this place have an obligation to protect unity and social cohesion. There is no room in our country for antisemitism. There is no room in our country for Islamophobia.

I want to share with the House some recent research from the United Kingdom. It's in the UK context, but I think we can all benefit from it. More in Common is an NGO that we should all know in this place. It was founded in the wake of the murder of UK member of Parliament Jo Cox by a right-wing extremist, while she was doing what all MPs do—serving her community on the street, talking to constituents. More in Common undertakes regular research aimed at finding ways to tackle increasing fragmentation and polarisation in democratic societies. Its recent research 'More than taking sides', on the way that the UK community has responded to the Middle East conflict, offers lessons for us here in Australia.

More in Common's in-depth research in the UK highlights that the simplistic portrayal of a community divided into sides by the conflict in the Middle East that is often seen on social media belies the overwhelming majority of citizens who have complex feelings about the conflict and are feeling 'simultaneously angry about the actions of murderous terrorists, concerned for civilians in both Israel and Gaza, and profoundly worried about what the situation means for community relations here in the UK.' Even worse, the polarisation portrayed on social media isn't just inaccurate, as More in Common says, it 'risks deepening division.' As More in Common states:

Dividing the country into stark binaries cedes discussion to those with the loudest voices and silences the views of the majority of Britons. That in turn risks polarisation on this issue becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy where ordinary Britons feel forced to choose and double down. It also gives licence to a small but vocal fringe of conflict entrepreneurs and extremists to use the conflict as an opportunity to sow discord and hate.

As leaders in this place we need to recognise the complex and conflicting feelings of many Australians on these issues. We need to encourage Australians to engage with each other with empathy, not contempt, to be curious about different perspectives, not judgemental. Such an approach is less likely to get traction on social media platforms, but it's where the vast majority of the Australian public wants their political leaders to be—to recognise their complex feelings on some of the most difficult issues imaginable and to focus on ensuring our diverse community can grapple with these issues with empathy and respect for each other. That is what we are all charged with as leaders in this place, and that is what I am working for in this nation and in my community.

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

I want to commend the member for Kennedy for bringing this motion to the House. The motion was seconded by my friend the member for Bradfield, who spoke extremely well on the issues that pertain to the terrible terrorist organisation that is Hamas. I note the Assistant Minister's speech as well, and I note that sitting next to me today is the chair of the international allies caucus on Israel, the member for Fisher.

I want to begin by saying something you might not expect. I'm asking you to believe Hamas. Believe them when they say they want to exterminate all Jewish people. Believe them when they chant, 'From the river to the sea.' Believe them, because their actions and their evil speak volumes. Their deliberate and calculated actions on 7 October saw babies captured, caged and killed. It saw women sexually assaulted on the streets. It saw children sexually assaulted in front of their parents, and parents sexually assaulted in front of their children, before they were murdered. In homes, places of love, security and safety, the most gruesome and cruel tortures and humiliations were inflicted upon families. In fields surrounding a music festival, young people were hunted like prey. There were actions so evil and so horrific that they would defile our shared humanity by recounting them. Believe Hamas, because they filmed, broadcasted and boasted of their crimes. Believe Hamas, because they continue to mistreat and kill hostages. Believe Hamas, because they have a history of murdering their own people. Like with the Nazis and ISIS, our humanity underestimates this evil at our peril.

No matter our race, creed or nationality, we are all people of memory and story. We grapple with our histories of family and country and of understanding the good and the bad, pain and hope, and relationships that unite and divide. The whispers of history reside in us all. For Jewish people, these are the whispers of persecutions, pogroms and the Holocaust, so we know what it means when a Greens MP speaks of Jewish tentacles and argues publicly for the exclusion of Jewish people from charities, sporting groups, culture and politics.

This is a sick conspiracy theory. We've seen this before. We know what it means, and we know where it leads. We know what it means when businesses are boycotted for no other reason than that the owner is Jewish. We know what it means when art galleries are shunned or vandalised because they're supported by Jewish Australians. Hamas didn't just seek to brutalise Israel. They sought to unleash antisemitism across the world and, sadly, they have.

Like Jewish people around the world, I'm seeking to understand the complexities of our times. As a parent, I'm trying to explain why there are people that hate me and my family and wish us harm for no other reason than our faith tradition. As an Australian, I wonder how our shared ethos has been corroded on our campuses and by extremist politicians of the far left.

This is a time for empathy. Empathy is not merely identifying with people who are just like us; it's something deeper. True empathy is seeing the humanity of someone when they are not like us and when we don't see ourselves in the face of another. It's a challenge for all of us, no matter our background. One of the groups I've learnt empathy from is the local Persian community in my electorate. One of them brought a book to my office as big as an old-fashioned telephone book. It was leather bound and in it were the names and photos of tens of thousands killed by the sponsor of Hamas, the Iranian regime. I learnt that, whilst the government of Iran exports terror around the world, including to Gaza, its first victims were in fact the people of Iran. I do think of the people of Gaza, many of whom live in fear of Hamas. We know that Hamas exercises the most vile punishments on its own citizens—on women, on gay people, on people of other faiths and on anyone who might disagree with them.

The Leader of the Opposition is right. This is a time for moral clarity, and I think of our country and what lies ahead. Will Australians continue to see the humanity of the Jewish people? Or will we condemn Jewish people because of an ideology and conspiracy theories that say they embody privilege or, as the Greens imply, somehow have tentacles?

To the members of the Greens, I say: I don't have tentacles, neither does my five-year-old son or my two-year-old daughter; neither does my friend the member for Macnamara, the member for Isaacs or the member for Macarthur; and neither do the patriotic Jewish Australians who contribute to the country they love by serving in the ADF or the police force, by supporting community organisations, by bolstering multiculturalism and by making this country stronger. We give back because that's what we're called to do and because that's what it means to be a good Australian. We don't have tentacles. We are human beings just like you.

So I say to the Greens: it is time to root out the antisemitism in your political party. This is a test of your moral courage and humanity. Time always exposes behaviours and motives, and your response to your fellow Australians will go down through history.

On 5 October, just prior to the Hamas attacks, the High Court Justice Jayne Jagot, who herself is not Jewish, gave what I think is an extraordinary and important speech. She gave the Zelman Cowen oration, and she focused the speech not on Cowen's extraordinary work as a jurist or as Governor-General but on antisemitism. She reminded us that antisemitism is the 'canary in the coalmine of global hatred'. More than a threat to the Jewish people, antisemitism is a broader symptom of an underlying loss of confidence in liberal democratic ideals and practices.

The Hamas attacks were more than an attack on Israel. They were an attack on our shared democratic ideals, and our democratic ideals are always defended by people of goodwill. I saw that defence after the 7 October attacks, when members of a local Anglican church in my electorate brought flowers to my office because they wanted to let me know that the local Christian community were standing with me and other Jewish Australians and were thinking of us at this difficult time. I saw it when constituents stopped me regularly in the street just to let me know they were standing with the Jewish people. We saw it today with Nova Peris's brave statements and similar actions from Indigenous leaders like Marcia Langton, Warren Mundine and Sean Gordon. And I've seen it in the genuine multipartisan work on antisemitism I've been doing with my friends the member for Macnamara and the member for Wentworth.

This land, like so few in human history and like so few around the world, has been good to the Jewish people. It is a wonderful and underappreciated aspect of our broader Australian story. I believe it will continue to be so if we as Australians, regardless of our faith and regardless of our background, continue to stand and resist those who would seek to deny the humanity of the Jewish people.

Tim Watts (Gellibrand, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I table the joint statement from the prime ministers of Australia, Canada and New Zealand about this issue.

Question agreed to.