Ex Labor minister slams omission of word ‘antisemitism’ from Bondi review

Peter Wertheim, co-head of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, said the review’s terms of reference were “too narrowly focused” on intelligence and law enforcement agencies, and omitted the “wider context in which those agencies operate”.

“To get to the heart of the matter there needs to be an honest examination of government policies and the conduct and policies of key institutions and figures in major sectors of our society. Their contribution to the unprecedented levels of antisemitism in this country over the last two years must be addressed,” he said, arguing that the proposed royal commission was the only way to tackle the issues.

“What might emerge could indeed be divisive and ugly but the divisiveness and ugliness is already there. Confronting these demons will be cathartic. It’s our only hope of establishing a new national consensus and setting clear standards.”

Jeremy Leibler, the president of the Zionist Federation of Australia, said the terms of reference not mentioning antisemitism or Jewish Australians was “indefensible”.

“The problem with the federal government establishing only the Richardson review and not a royal commission is that Richardson is directed only to look at the security agencies response, and not at all on any of the underlying root causes of the problems of antisemitism,” he said.

The government remains staunchly opposed to a federal royal commission, arguing it would be too slow and would showcase hate speech, while the Richardson review would be faster and the former security chief was the best person to come up with the answers because of the depth of his expertise.

Under questioning on Monday about the omission of the word “antisemitism” from the review’s terms of reference, Albanese said: “the whole framework is about that”.

Loading

“It will look at a comprehensive examination of what occurred, if there are any gaps, if there are any gaps between the Commonwealth and New South Wales as well, what response is required thoroughly, practically and efficiently reporting in months, not years ahead, acting with unity and urgency, not division and delay,” Albanese said.

During the same press conference Albanese cited “actual experts” as being in favour of the review over a federal royal commission, a line the opposition has attacked, demanding expert advice to be published.

Shadow attorney-general Andrew Wallace said Albanese was “continuing to bend over backwards to avoid calling a Commonwealth royal commission into antisemitism, now claiming that unnamed experts advised him to prioritise an internal departmental review”.

Wallace said Albanese’s reference to consulting experts on the best way forward was “deeply offensive and dismissive” to the Jewish community and victim’s families.

“No one is more expert than those directly impacted by antisemitism, many of whom have been warning the Albanese government about its consequences for more than two years,” Wallace said.

On Wednesday 16 December, Jewish organisations including the Australian Union of Jewish Students and the Rabbinical Council of Australia penned an open letter demanding a federal royal commission. It comes after similar letters were published from 17 victim’s families and more than 140 senior members of the Australian bar.

Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.