Josh Burns (Macnamara, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights, I present the committee's report, incorporating dissenting reports, entitled Inquiry into antisemitism at Australian universities.

Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e).

by leave—In August 2023, the Social Research Centre released a report on the experiences of Jewish students on our university campuses. It found that almost two in every three students had experienced antisemitism on campus. Over half the Jewish students were hiding their identity on campus, and almost a quarter of all Jewish students that took part in the survey were avoiding campus altogether. And yet, as many of the vice-chancellors gave evidence in our inquiry, the situation for Jewish students and staff since October 7 2023 has only gotten worse. We have seen students glorify terrorism, alleged Nazi salutes, staff offices occupied, academics doxxed and students' requests for support ignored. For too long, Jewish students have been vilified, intimidated, excluded from societies and clubs, ostracised in student union meetings and fundamentally let down by the university procedures that are meant to look after their safety and their wellbeing. The status quo is not good enough. The status quo must change before students return to campus in a few weeks' time, and that was the purpose of our inquiry.

On 29 October 2024, the Attorney-General requested that the committee inquire into and report on antisemitism at Australian universities and consider not only the prevalence, nature and experience of antisemitic activities at universities but also the effectiveness of university frameworks to prevent and respond to antisemitism, as well as the support provided to Jewish students and staff. We received 47 public submissions and held four public hearings during which we heard evidence from numerous universities, community groups, peak bodies, the Department of Education, and the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency. The committee also had close regard to the public evidence provided to the legal and constitutional affairs committee inquiry into the Commission of Inquiry into Antisemitism at Australian Universities Bill 2024. That inquiry received over 600 submissions, many from Jewish students and staff detailing their own personal experiences.

What became evident was not only were there brazen incidents of antisemitism that went without consequence or leadership by some of the university vice-chancellors but there was a serious lack of consistency across our university sector. Some universities had clear policies on antisemitism, and others were without an adequate understanding or commitment to combating incidents of antisemitism. We heard from Jewish students and staff who did not have faith in university reporting procedures to keep them safe. They didn't feel that their experiences were being acknowledged or taken seriously, nor did they feel they were being acted upon. They felt they were let down by an institution that was meant to be welcoming and safe, and our inquiry highlighted the importance of listening to the lived experiences of Jewish students and staff. There was a stark difference between the universities who engaged proactively with the Jewish community and let their experiences guide the university's response and those who did not. The committee has made 10 recommendations, most of which relate to policies that universities can put into place for the beginning of this academic year, including direct engagement with Jewish students and staff by the vice-chancellors; adopting a definition of antisemitism; introducing antisemitism training; simplifying the complaints process to encourage students to report any incidents; and publishing de-identified complaints reports to improve transparency and trust in the system. Importantly, the implementation of these recommendations must be monitored, and there must be an improvement in accountability across our country. Within 12 months of tabling this report, the National Student Ombudsman should review university practices to reduce antisemitism on campus.

Over the summer, we worked tirelessly to be able to table this report today because immediate action is what is required. It should not have taken a national antisemitism crisis and a parliamentary inquiry for universities and vice-chancellors to take the concerns of Jewish students and staff seriously, concerns that they have been sharing for years. It shouldn't have taken this moment for universities to take accountability and consider their own duty of care. It shouldn't have taken our committee's work for universities to stand up and proactively, with firmness, reject antisemitism on campus. Right now, we are at a pivotal point where universities must implement significant changes to ensure that Jewish students and staff go back to campus for 2025 knowing their safety is taken seriously and, if there are incidents on campus, they will be addressed in a timely and transparent way.

I want to thank all of the committee members for working together on this report. I especially want to make note of the deputy chair, who was a very fine colleague throughout this inquiry and who brought great intent and effort to this inquiry and was firm and fair and very easy to work with. I thank you, Deputy Chair. The recommendations in this report were bipartisan, and I'm proud of that, and they should be monitored and implemented regardless of what happens at the election. I want to thank and acknowledge the committee secretariat, who spent much of their summer compiling this report and the evidence given in it. I want to thank them for their tireless work in supporting me and all of the committee members. Most importantly, I want to thank the Jewish students and staff who shared their experiences with both our committees. The advocacy that you provided on behalf of the Jewish students and the entire Jewish community as well as all minorities who attend university means that change is coming. For that, you should be proud. For that, we are grateful.

Universities must act now. There has been progress. We are seeing an improvement in attitudes by some university leaders, and I have no doubt of the role our committee has played in that. I also want to acknowledge the work that the universities are doing engaging with the Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism as well as through the Group of Eight; however, significant reform is still needed so that Jewish students and staff are safe on campus. Our report outlines the policies needed to achieve exactly that. It is now up to the universities. We are watching, and we will continue to ensure that our Jewish students and staff are safe, just as everyone deserves to be. I commend the committee's inquiry report to the House.

Henry Pike (Bowman, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I rise to speak on the report of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights Inquiry into antisemitism at Australian universities. Coalition members of the committee support the report's findings but believe that stronger action is needed in key areas to drive real change on campus. Our addendum to the report outlines where we want to see further action. The evidence the committee received demonstrated that there has been an alarming and abhorrent rise in antisemitism among students and staff at Australian universities. Ancient hatreds like antisemitism should have no place in Australia. Antisemitism is inherently un-Australian. In the last century, nearly 40,000 Australians sacrificed their lives to bring an end to the evils of Nazism. A generation earlier, over 109,000 Australians served proudly under Sir John Monash, the Jewish Australian considered by many, including myself, to be our greatest Australian. It is a disgrace that antisemitism has now found a home in the very university he attended 130 years ago and where he served as vice-chancellor a century ago. It's a damning reflection on Australian universities that, despite all their rhetoric on diversity and inclusion, these institutions were more enlightened and more welcoming to Jewish students over 100 years ago than they are today.

While many vice-chancellors presented to the committee that their institutions were merely subject to broader societal pressures and are a microcosm of broader Australian society, coalition members have come to a different conclusion. We are deeply concerned, based on the balance of evidence presented to the committee inquiry, that Australian universities have become incubators of antisemitic thought in our country. Coalition members concur with the government's antisemitism envoy, Jillian Segal, that there is systemic, embedded antisemitism within our university campuses. We've been particularly alarmed by the numerous examples of university academics who have espoused antisemitic tropes, the inability of university leaders to appropriately deal with the spread of such rhetoric, the impact of this antisemitism on Jewish students and the broader failure to uphold a safe and respectful learning environment. Coalition members underscore the committee's finding that the rise in antisemitism on campus has been clearly exacerbated by the reluctance of many university administrators to enforce meaningful consequences for misconduct.

The committee inquiry has shone a light on the issue and highlighted some key failures. However, the committee's inquiry has demonstrated the limits of a parliamentary inquiry into such an important topic. Despite the best efforts of members to get to the truth and secure answers to our questions, our hearings were a masterclass in obfuscation by university leaders. Coalition members maintain our position that a properly constituted, full-time judicial inquiry, led by a respected and eminent jurist, is the only way to ensure the necessary powers, confidentiality and expertise required to forensically examine and address the crisis. Coalition members support the call of Jillian Segal and representatives of every major Jewish organisation across the nation, who strongly support the establishment of an independent judicial inquiry. Coalition members disagree with the position of the majority of committee members that the government should wait even further to see if Australian universities take appropriate action before establishing a judicial inquiry. While we are pleased to see the majority of committee members agree that a judicial inquiry should be given consideration, coalition members contend that the time for consideration has well and truly elapsed. After extended inaction, despite escalating instances of antisemitic violence across our cities, Jewish Australians deserve immediate and concrete measures from this federal government rather than continued delays that allow antisemitism to continue to fester within our universities. Coalition members continue our call for the government to immediately establish an independent judicial inquiry into the antisemitism on Australian campuses. Nothing else can get to the heart of the problem.

I want to thank the committee secretariat, who have undertaken a lot of extracurricular work this term—beyond their usual, enormous work rate in dealing with the committee's scrutiny functions. I'd particularly like to thank the committee chair, the member for Macnamara, for the approach he's taken during this inquiry. I trust we have done some good together.

All eyes are on our universities as a new semester begins. If university leaders continue to fail in their duties to protect students and staff, this parliament must act.

Kylea Tink (North Sydney, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I rise to speak to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights report on the inquiry into antisemitism at Australian universities. I want to start by thanking the chair of the committee, the member for Macnamara, because I think he did an excellent job in holding us all together and holding space for this really important inquiry. I also want to thank all my fellow committee members for their engagement with and participation in the inquiry and extend my heartfelt thanks to all of those who supplied evidence. The testimony of many witnesses was immensely powerful, and the sincerity and frankness they brought to the discussion was invaluable. I'd like to particularly thank the Jewish community, who spoke so eloquently and honestly about their experiences and fears, and, again, reiterate my deep concern and care for them. The testimony of the Australasian Union of Jewish Students in particular stayed with me throughout the hearings—thank you for your courage.

As a member of the 47th parliament, I feel the incredible weight that comes with participating in an inquiry like this one. To think our society has reached a point where we needed to hold this inquiry is a sad indictment on the direction we are headed in indeed. As a person the community from North Sydney sent to parliament to represent them during this term, hear me when I say that the people who surround me every day in my community share a common belief that all of us have the right to feel safe, be treated with respect and participate in our society without fear of vilification or discrimination based on our individual characteristics. We condemn all forms of racism and are horrified at the recent antisemitic attacks that we've witnessed across our country. We must do better. To this moment then, while I support the majority of the committee's recommendations and the report as a whole, I do have some concerns with particular recommendations, which I'd like to address.

Firstly, while I certainly support the adoption of a definition of antisemitism by universities, I do not agree with the committee's recommendation that this definition must align closely with the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition. Rather, I believe we heard compelling and legitimate testimony from numerous witnesses and submitters that highlighted concerns regarding the appropriateness of this definition for the university sector. Many posited that it inappropriately captures expression which is legitimate and does not constitute antisemitism, that it poses a threat to academic freedom and freedom of speech on campuses, and that this could be used to shut down legitimate criticism of the government of Israel or the political ideology of Zionism. At the same time, I also believe we received compelling evidence, particularly from the Group of Eight, that there is already an active commitment to developing and mobilising behind a shared definition of antisemitism. In this context, I believe the most appropriate recommendation would have been that universities should, for the purposes of addressing complaints of antisemitism relating to students or staff, adopt a definition of antisemitism that recognises the distinction between antisemitism and the criticism of Israel, the Israeli government and Zionism.

Secondly, I disagree with the committee's fourth recommendation that the government give consideration as to whether it is necessary to amend the Fair Work Act 2009 to enable disciplinary or other action to be taken in relation to a university employee, on the basis that there was not sufficient evidence or testimony on which to base such a broad-reaching recommendation. The committee did hear ample evidence from several universities regarding their existing disciplinary processes, including some universities that are already in the process of reviewing the rules governing their responses to reports of misconduct. The committee did not, however, receive any evidence proposing specific amendments to the Fair Work Act 2009 or the Australian Research Council Act 2001. No witnesses or submitters raised specific concerns regarding either of these acts, yet somehow this report recommends that course of action. Given this, I cannot in good faith let that recommendation go unchallenged.

Thirdly, I do not support recommendation 10:

… if, following a review of the implementation of these recommendations …it is apparent that the response by universities has been insufficient, the government should give consideration to the establishment of a judicial inquiry.

This is because I believe that not only is this recommendation overly speculative but also it was not supported by any compelling evidence to demonstrate that a judicial inquiry is either necessary or of specific use in this context.

With that said, I'd also like to make some brief additional comments. Firstly, many submitters and witnesses highlighted that the increase in antisemitism in Australia and on university campuses has been accompanied by a rise in other forms of racism, particularly Islamophobia, following the October 7 attacks. Interestingly, it was the Australasian Union of Jewish Students who first raised this argument, as they identified that addressing antisemitism in a silo fashion may not be the best way of addressing the issue and that dealing with broader racism as a whole is a better approach. Many others pointed out that the Australian Human Rights Commission's National Anti-Racism Framework, which provides a whole-of-society road map for governments, non-government organisations, businesses and civil society organisations to address issues of racism across sectors, is a useful tool to combat antisemitism.

Additionally, several witnesses recommended that Australia's existing suite of antidiscrimination legislation be amended. In this regard, I have recommended that the government adopt the Australian Human Rights Commission's National Anti-Racism Framework; that universities address antisemitism as part of broader strategies to reduce racism in all its forms; and that the government consider consolidating Australia's antidiscrimination legislative framework into a single uniform antidiscrimination act.

Finally, I'd like to highlight that many submitters also raised the need for a human rights framework or a human rights based approach to effectively navigate competing human rights, such as the right to equity and nondiscrimination with the rights to education and freedom of expression.

A number of submitters highlighted the direct relevance of the United Nation's Rabat plan of action on the prohibition of the advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence. It's a detailed framework for distinguishing hate speech from protected expression. Given this, I've also recommended that universities adopt the Rabat plan of action and that the government introduce legislation to establish a human rights act as per the recommendation of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights inquiry into Australia's human rights framework.

During my valedictory speech on Monday I reflected on the fact that as a nation we faced significant challenges over the course of the last three years, including increasing global conflict, starting with the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the Iranian regime's crackdown on its citizens, the appalling Hamas attacks on October 7 in Israel and the ongoing war in Gaza. Every instance has left us shocked as we've witnessed the brutality that people have levelled against one another, with far too many lives caught in the crossfire.

Here at home the campaign around the Voice referendum unveiled a schism in our society that stunned many, while more recently the rise of all forms of racism, and in particular the completely incomprehensible instances of antisemitism, has created a sense that hate is boiling over. Surely in this context we must ask ourselves: what is it that we believe in today, and what are we prepared to do to fight for those beliefs?

Universities are undoubtedly a direct reflection of our broader society, and they play a pivotal role in shaping thinking and expectations. Given this, I believe they have a great responsibility when it comes to ensuring they are places that value respect and tolerance and foster an environment where everyone feels safe. We must all do better, and I thank them in advance for learning from the mistakes of the past two years and for not only committing to doing better but providing tangible evidence of their improvement in the years to come.

Again, I'd like to thank the chair of the committee, the member for Macnamara. You truly were an inspiration to work with through this process, so thank you.

Josh Burns (Macnamara, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the House take note of the report.

Debate adjourned.