Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to move the following motion:

That this House recognise the State of Palestine.

Leave not granted.

I move:

That so much of standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the member for Melbourne moving the following motion:

That this House recognise the State of Palestine.

Recognition of Palestine is long overdue; 143 countries have already done it. Three more—Norway, Spain and Ireland—joined overnight, and today Australia must stand with them in recognising the State of Palestine. This is not just a symbolic move; it is a critical step towards peace and towards ending the slaughter that we are seeing with the invasion of Gaza right now. It is a concrete step towards peace and, as the Prime Minister of Norway said last week, 'There cannot be peace in the Middle East if there is no recognition.'

It is critical that we debate this now, just as other countries have interrupted what they were doing to recognise Palestine now, because the scale and of the slaughter and the genocide that we are witnessing is now topping 36,000 people—36,000 civilians who have been slaughtered. A health system has been destroyed. There are mass graves in hospitals, aid has been blocked and children are now dying because they do not have enough to eat or drink. We are seeing, right now, human-engineered famine that is taking a toll on a civilian population that amounts to collective punishment of these people. And it is time for countries, including Australia, to step in and do something. Just as other countries have made it a priority to recognise the State of Palestine, so should this government today, right now, by backing this motion.

The Greens know that recognition alone won't stop the invasion or end the occupation. We want to see the government take some real, concrete steps to put pressure on this extreme war cabinet of Benjamin Netanyahu that is subject to orders to stop genocide. We want to see an end to the two-way trade, the military trade, with Israel. We want to see sanctions imposed on this extreme war cabinet and we want to see the ambassador expelled until this slaughter ends.

Even if you disagree with all of those measures and are unwilling to take those steps to bring about some practical pressure on this extreme war cabinet of Benjamin Netanyahu, you can still support this motion because this motion says very simply, 'This House will recognise the State of Palestine,' and join the majority of other countries around the world that do the same. Labor promised people before the election that it would do this. Labor promised people that it would do the exact words in this motion. So now at stake is also something that needs to be resolved today, namely: whether, when it comes to the push for peace, people can believe that Labor will do what they say.

I notice in the last couple of days that Labor has said that they support a two-state solution. You can't support a two-state solution if you recognise only one side of it. What is becoming crystal clear is that Labor's words are just a fig leaf for saying that something might happen in the future while they back now the destruction of the conditions that would allow a Palestinian state to survive and thrive. Labor's empty words are a hope that something might be done in the future, while Labor backs to the hilt a genocidal war that is destroying the possibility of a state of Palestine. Instead what has happened, despite them taking to the election a promise to say that they would recognise Palestine, Labor has stood with the extreme Israeli government of Benjamin Netanyahu, together with its ministers, who've dehumanised the Palestinians and called for the erasure of their territory.

Labor has stood by as settlements have been built, with over 400,000 settlers in the West Bank, in what is meant to be Palestinian territory and part of a Palestinian state. Labor has stood by as checkpoints have been built and roads that Palestinians aren't able to use have been constructed that divide their country into Bandustans, where they are unable to exercise effective self-government. Meanwhile, Labor has backed the invasion in Gaza that has seen a health system destroyed, a human engineered famine and the majority of people's homes in that region be razed to the ground. Labor has backed every single step that has been taken by this extreme Netanyahu government to destroy the conditions of a two-state solution. I say to Labor here, now, 'This is urgent, because if you really believe what you are saying about recognising the State of Palestine, then you would stop backing the invasion, you would recognise Palestine now and you would take steps against this extreme Israeli government that is conducting a genocide, instead of backing them to the hilt.'

Recognition—what this motion is about is recognition and recognition only. This isn't just a political question; it is a deeply moral question as well, because the people of Palestine have endured displacement and suffering for far too long. This motion is about saying, 'The values that we hold dear, the right to live in freedom and exercise self-determination and to wake up every day thinking about how am I going to make my life better rather than how am I going to avoid another bomb that is going to fall on me.' Those simple values about wanting to live in peace and security. This is about saying those values should be enjoyed equally by everyone around the world. Those values of peace and security and self-determination should be enjoyed equally by Palestinians and Israelis alike. This is about saying, as a matter of morality, 'We will not stand by as others' rights to self-determination and to live in peace and security and freedom are destroyed.'

There will come a time when people look back at this horrific invasion and ask, 'How did we let it happen?' And when they do, they will look at what was said in this chamber, they will look at how every member of this chamber voted and they will look at the actions that took place. There will be no hiding. The history books will not lie. At the moment, what they will see is every Labor and Liberal member voting together to support the invasion, against the calls of the United Nations and humanitarian groups around the world. They will see Labor and Liberal continuing to say that this is about Israel's right to defend itself, when everyone is saying those actions have now exceeded and gone far beyond that and are amounting to collective punishment of civilians. They will see Labor defunding UNWRA—critical funding to Palestinians—right when it was needed most, and they will see Labor doing little more than offering stern words, even after Israel's military attacked Rafah, having been ordered by the International Court of Justice not to.

Even after the International Court of Justice said, 'Don't invade Rafah,' all that Labor can do is offer hand-wringing tweets, continue the trade with Israel and continue to act as if nothing happened. Well, genocide and war crimes happen when the perpetrators think there are going to be no consequences, when they think governments around the world will stand by, do nothing and continue to actively back their invasion. Hand-wringing tweets from this government are no longer good enough. It is time for the government to take action, and it can start by recognising the state of Palestine.

The best time to have stopped this horrific invasion was eight months ago, but the next best time is now. There is a reason other countries around the world, right now, today, are shifting their positions to recognise the state of Palestine. Australia should join them. Labor promised at the election that they would do that and, if they believe even a 10th of what they say, they should vote for this motion so that this House, today, recognises the state of Palestine.

Max Chandler-Mather (Griffith, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

At the very least, this government should recognise the state of Palestine. Really, the question is: what is the red line for Labor when it comes to Israel's genocide in Gaza? How many kids does Israel have to burn alive before Labor will literally take any action against Israel? What will it take for it to stop giving public money to Israeli weapons companies? What will it take for it to stop sending arms and ammunition to Israel?

To get the human consequences of this action, here's just one moment from the Rafah massacre, as quoted in CNN:

A video filmed for CNN in the hospital courtyard shows several body bags laid on the ground with dozens of anguished people including men, women and children crowded around their late loved ones.

People are seen crouching over the body bags, with some caressing their loved one's lifeless bodies. At least one baby's head can be seen sticking out of a bag, as the woman beside it shouts: "My whole family has perished."

…   …   …

Lifting the baby boy's body to the camera, Mahmoud Abu Taha cries out, "this is who they are targeting. This is their objective. This is the generation they're looking for. This is the safe Rafah they talk about."

…   …   …

Another eyewitness says a five-day-old boy named Ghaith Abu Rayya was killed in the airstrike. The footage shows him opening a small body bag to reveal the infant's head, saying his body has been dismembered.

"We are all alone. Nobody cares about us," he cries.

He is seen opening another body bag next to Ghaith's, sobbing, and saying, "my beloved Ramy," who he says is Ghaith's 33-year-old father.

This is just one moment for the 35,000 people—Palestinians—that have been murdered in Palestine by the Israeli government.

But what's most remarkable about the reactions from members on either side in this House is the lack of responsibility. In response to the speech of the member for Melbourne, the Leader of the Australian Greens, we sat here and heard: 'Oh, no. The government doesn't back the invasion of Gaza. No. No. We don't do any of that.' Well, take some responsibility. You are the government. You signed a $917 million weapons contract with Elbit Systems in February this year. The CEO of Elbit Systems, the blacklisted Israeli weapons company, has said recently, 'We have seen increased interest in our weapons recently because they're in operational use in Gaza'—as in killing Palestinians.

In February this year, you allowed for $1.5 million worth of arms and ammunition to be sent to Israel. And you say, 'Oh, no. That didn't happen'! It's from the government's own data. There are other country that can expel ambassadors when countries engage in genocide, but, no, there's nothing here. Those are actions that this government could take. You could recognise the state of Palestine, and you sit here and pretend that you have no power. Let's be real about this: every time Israel massacre civilians and burn children alive, they look around the world and wait for the consequences—and none come from governments like Australia. That's why they know they can get away with it.

As the member for Melbourne said, history will remember people in this place and what they did. They'll ask, 'What did you do when there was a massacre and a genocide going on in Gaza, when mothers and fathers held the lifeless bodies of their children in their hands who had starved to death because they had run out of energy to breathe as a result of Israel's engineered famine?' They'll ask: 'What did you do? What did you do in this place?' It's remarkable—I'm sure we're going to hear some members in this place get up after this and talk about social cohesion, and they're going to say words like, 'We want to oppose the invasion of Rafah.' Well, sending weapons to Israel, sending money—

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

That's a lie!

Max Chandler-Mather (Griffith, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A lie! Here we go; a Labor member in this place says it's a lie. Go to your own government's website. What is the $1.5 million to Israel in arms ammunition? This is the most remarkable thing. At the very least, stand up and take responsibility. At the very least, stand up and take responsibility for the death and destruction that you are complicit in.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Griffith will cease using the word 'you'. I am not part of this debate. You shall direct your remarks through the chair under the standing orders.

Max Chandler-Mather (Griffith, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Speaker—members of this place who are from the Labor Party, who are complicit in this genocide in Gaza. It is genuinely remarkable. There is more passion in this place from members of the Labor Party about defending their own reputation than there is in this place about the murder of 35,000 Palestinians. Let's be real about this. You know what's affecting social cohesion? An Australian government sending arms and weapons and ammunition, and trading in arms with a country carrying out a genocide that sees people starved to death, lose the energy to breathe and burnt alive, and mothers and fathers losing their children.

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

The member for Melbourne knows very well that he is not moving a motion today to recognise Palestine; he is moving a procedural motion about not dealing with the parliament's agenda. The member for Melbourne knows full well that procedural motions like this are always opposed. Why he would be deliberately setting up a vote on Palestinian recognition to fail is something only he can answer.

The Greens Party had an opportunity to select this motion for debate at an allocated time on Monday but chose not to; only the Greens leader can explain the reason. The foreign minister, Penny Wong, has made clear statements in the last month about the government's approach to Palestinian recognition. The Greens are trying to exploit the war for votes. Simplistic wedge motions in the House do nothing to advance the cause of peace. Wedge politics only divides the community. We gain nothing from the Greens seeking to reproduce this conflict in our own community.

If they were sincere the Greens would have something of substance to say about ending the cycle of violence and achieving lasting peace. Anyone who is serious about peace knows that that requires a two-state solution—a Palestinian state alongside the state of Israel. But the Greens aren't serious. They prefer slogans to policy. A two-state solution requires working together and the recognition of each other. It requires a maturity the Greens do not have. They're just doing the same thing the Liberal Party is doing and playing politics over the war.

On the question of recognition, we have made clear we will be guided by whether recognition will advance the cause for peace. Like many countries, Australia has been frustrated by the lack of progress in this regard. Like Germany and the UK, staunch friends of Israel, Australia no longer sees recognition as only occurring at the end of the process; it could occur as part of a peace process and once there is progress on serious governance reforms and security concerns.

Hamas is a terrorist organisation. We see no role for them in this. A Palestinian state cannot be in a position to threaten Israel's security. We want to see a reformed Palestinian governing authority that is committed to peace, disavows violence and is ready to engage in a meaningful peace process. We want to see a commitment to peace in how the Palestinian Authority leads its people. The final status of core issues such as Jerusalem and the borders of a future Palestinian state should be defined through direct negotiations. The 19 April G7 statement noted that the recognition of a Palestinian state at an appropriate time would be a crucial component of that political process. The Greens and the opposition should stop picking fights and be a part of a discussion that the whole world is grappling with, which is how we advance lasting peace through a two-state solution.

Now, in contrast to those playing domestic political games in this chamber, the international community is taking a serious approach on this. The overwhelming majority of international community—some 143 countries, including Australia—voted for a resolution on this in the UN General Assembly recently. That motion retained the observer status of the Palestinian mission with the extension of some modest additional rights to participate in UN forums. It did not give the Palestinian mission membership at the UN or voting rights at the General Assembly, but, consistent with a two-state solution, it did express the General Assembly's aspiration for Palestinian membership in the UN, noting that this must ultimately be recommended by the Security Council, consistent with the UN charter. It did reaffirm the international community's unwavering support for the two-state solution of Israel and Palestine living side by side in peace and security within recognised borders—something the Leader of the Greens was unable to do on the weekend. That resolution, in that respect, was a clear rejection of the goals and methods of Hamas. A two-state solution—Israel and Palestine—is the opposite of what Hamas wants. Hamas does not want peace. This rejection of Hamas was one of the reasons Australia voted for the resolution.

Like with many countries, this vote didn't represent bilateral recognition on Australia's part, but the international community is engaged seriously with this issue. Let's have a look at what our international partners—what other, like minded countries in the world—did with respect to this motion. Almost all of our region and many of our closest partners voted yes for this UN resolution, including our ally New Zealand; our special strategic partner Japan; our comprehensive strategic partners Indonesia, Singapore and the Republic of Korea; and every ASEAN nation. Like Australia, New Zealand voted yes. It considered a resolution a positive step on a pathway towards an eventual two-state solution. For Singapore, our close to close regional partner, their explanation of vote stated:

… Singapore's support for this resolution is a vote in favour of a negotiated two-state solution at a critical juncture in a very troubled region.

Japan, our strategic security partner, said:

… Japan also voted in favor of the General Assembly's resolution that grants Palestine additional rights as an Observer State on the understanding that these rights are not inconsistent with the framework of the UN Charter.

The United Kingdom has said:

Setting out a horizon for a Palestinian state should be one of the vital conditions for moving from a pause in the fighting to a sustainable ceasefire.

Lord Cameron has said they will look at the issue of recognising a Palestinian state, including at the United Nations, and has said that this 'could make the two-state solution irreversible'.

As I said, this didn't constitute bilateral recognition on Australia's part. We've said that we need to see a reformed Palestinian governing authority that's committed to peace, that disavows violence and that is ready to engage in a meaningful peace process. We want to see a commitment to peace in how the Palestinian Authority leads its people. We want to see a reformed Palestinian Authority capable of representing the entire occupied Palestinian territories. At the same time, Israel cannot continue to take unilateral action to entrench the occupation and to prevent a viable Palestinian state.

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

I oppose this suspension of standing orders. This is the wrong motion at the wrong time moved by the wrong people. This will do nothing to change the situation on the ground in the Middle East and it will not do anything to beneficial social cohesion in this country. The coalition supports a two-state solution in the Middle East, but we are opposed to the unilateral recognition of a Palestinian state. A Palestinian state should only be recognised by Australia after a peace agreement has been reached with Israel after negotiations have been concluded on the ground. Key to that recognition is for Palestinian leaders to recognise Israel's inherent right to exist, which many of them simply don't. The member for Melbourne's motion undermines the work of peacemakers on the ground and rewards those who choose violence over negotiation.

The motion comes at a time that sends a message that Hamas's violent terrorist attacks—its murders, its abductions, its gang rapes, its dismemberment of innocent children and its torture of people—should somehow be rewarded. This motion means recognising a Palestinian state when Palestinian leaders continue to refuse to recognise Israel's right to exist. This motion means recognising a Palestinian state when Hamas still has not released 130 Israeli hostages. This motion runs contrary to the traditions of Australian foreign policy. Australia simply doesn't recognise countries that have yet come into existence.

In some respects this Greens motion shouldn't amaze me, but it does. Why is a party that spends so much time talking about the rights of women and LGBTI people so keen to advocate for the cause of organisations like Hamas, which are among the greatest abusers of women and LGBTI people in the world? But the Greens are content to ignore these inconvenient facts. We shouldn't surprised by the Greens actions—they've got a terrible history when it comes to antisemitism. They've got no moral courage and they repeatedly fail to stand with our Western, liberal, democratic allies. Antisemitism has become a central plank of Greens philosophy. Every time the Greens have had the chance to stand with the Jewish community in this country, or our Western, liberal, democratic allies, they chose to stand against them. The Greens voted against the bipartisan motion in this House that condemned the 7 October terror attacks, even before Israel had begun its operations in Gaza. They voted against a bipartisan motion in the Senate last week condemning antisemitic chants at universities. The federal Greens have refused to condemn Jenny Leong for her comments that Jews had tentacles and that Jews shouldn't be able to participate in the public life of this country. On Insiders, the Greens leader couldn't bring himself to clearly say that he thought Hamas was a terrorist organisation. Similarly, when directly asked whether he support the idea of a Jewish state, he refused to answer.

Many people in this country vote for the Greens because they think they're a party of environmentalists, but their actions in this place show they're more interested in rewarding terrorists than in protecting the environment. Of the nine suspensions of standing orders the Greens have moved since 7 October, only a third relate to the environment while more than 55 per cent— (Time expired)

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The time for this debate has concluded. I'll put the question.

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

Point of order!

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, to the member for Kennedy, I'm putting the question under the standing orders. The question is that the motion be agreed to.

A division having been called and the bells being rung—

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

Mr Speaker, on a matter of such vital importance as this, shouldn't the House be seriously looking at this instead of giving a fairly extreme group over here the opportunity to have their say and nobody else to have their say, except for three minutes?

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Under the standing orders there are strict time limits for suspensions, so the debate is unable to be continued. That is out of my hands, as I'm guided by the standing orders.

The question is that the motion be agreed to.