NSW Jewish group ‘overwhelmed' by anti-Semitic incidents as landmark inquiry gets under way
A leading Jewish organisation has described being 'overwhelmed' by the 'sheer volume' of anti-Semitic incidents in NSW as a landmark state government inquiry gets under way.
Shooters, Fishers, and Farmers MP Robert Borsak is chairing the first hearing in state parliament on Monday of the NSW Legislative Council's inquiry into anti-Semitism in NSW, alongside Greens MLC Amanda Cohn and MLCs from Labor and the Liberals.
The inquiry seeks to examine the underlying causes behind the 'increasing prevalence and severity' of anti-Semitism in NSW, as well as the 'threat to social cohesion' it presents and how the safety of the state's Jewish community 'might be enhanced'.
NSW Jewish Board of Deputies president David Ossip told the inquiry that 'the past 20 months had seen an unprecedented and shocking rise in anti-Semitism' following the October 7 attack in Israel and the subsequent protests over the invasion of Gaza.
'For the first time, the Jewish community of Australia and NSW has felt unsafe and at risk, not because of anything it has done, but because of who we are,' he said.
'There have been moments where we have been completely overwhelmed as an organisation by the sheer volume and seriousness of anti-Semitic incidents which have been reported to us … No sphere of life has been immune to the virus of anti-Semitism.'
The inquiry was told of incidents reported to the organisation in which students were targeted because of their Jewish identity, including one in which a student was asked 'Are you Jewish? F**king Jews. You should kill yourself'.
'This all previously would have been unthinkable,' Mr Ossip told the inquiry.
In its submission, the board said there was a 339 per cent increase in incidents.
It comes after a spate of high-profile anti-Semitic incidents across Greater Sydney this past summer that led to the passing of controversial new anti-hate laws that outlawed protests outside places of worship among other strict measures.
NSW Jewish Board of Deputies chief executive Michele Goldman told the inquiry that the board welcomed the new anti-hate speech laws, and it was 'something we've been advocating for some time' and a 'first step' but called for more action to be taken.
'What we really need to see now is consistent application of the law to ensure that those people who are guilty of vilification, of harassment, of intimidation face the law and that there is effective deterrence to others,' Ms Goldman told the inquiry.
'A clear message is that this is not OK in our society. This is not for Australia.'
Opponents of the laws, including civil society groups and Jewish groups and individuals who made submissions to the inquiry, claim the laws limit free speech and were a 'kneejerk' reaction and warned about conflations between criticism of Israel and anti-Semitism.
Asked about those concerns, Mr Ossip said 'getting into this discussion is a bit of a red herring' and the overwhelming majority of incidents reported to the organisation were 'textbook anti-Semitism … (which) have nothing to do with Israel or Zionism'.
'I think where the line is crossed is where hatred of Israel spills over into suspicion of Jews more broadly or a view that Jews are pernicious, dangerous, or particularly egregious in their actions,' Mr Ossip told the inquiry.
'I think it's when protesters will deny the rights of Jews for self-determination and saying that Israel's very existence is illegitimate or inherently racist.'
Mr Ossip told the inquiry that Holocaust education 'isn't sufficient to combat anti-Semitism'.
He singled out 'tropes' that were often 'subtle and pernicious'.
On far-right extremism, Mr Ossip went on to add that 'they're obviously an immense concern to us, but we've been making mistakes just to describe it as anti-Semitism'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
an hour ago
- ABC News
Can the US Air Force bust Matt's studio bunker?
The United States has dropped some very large bombs on Iran, inserting itself into what we are currently calling the Israel-Iran War, despite Donald Trump saying just days earlier that he was going to spend two weeks thinking about it. The bombs they dropped managed to destroy or at least severely damage a nuclear facility buried 90 metres underground. Which kind of makes Matt's studio basement bunker superfluous. So what's next? Matt is joined by Emma Shortis, Director of the Australia Institute's International and Security Affairs Program and host of podcast and book After America to chat about what this means for the Middle East, and whether Australia will get pulled into the conflict. Follow If You're Listening on the ABC Listen app.
ABC News
5 hours ago
- ABC News
Did Australia provide support for the US strikes on Iran?
The Prime Minister today confirmed Australia supports Donald Trump's decision to bomb Iran's nuclear sites. But he wasn't weighing in on the debate over whether this US action is in breach of international law. Nor would he confirm whether Australia provided any support for this mission - only saying it w a unilateral action by the United States. Mike Pezzullo is the former Secretary of Home Affairs and a former Deputy Secretary of the Defence Department, and author of the 2009 defence white paper. He spoke to David Speers.
West Australian
6 hours ago
- West Australian
Editorial: Wishy-washy Anthony Albanese puts Australia on the outer
Close to 24 hours after the United States bombed key Iranian nuclear facilities, Anthony Albanese finally stood to address the nation. This was a pivotal point in history: Australia's closest military and strategic ally had made a bold strike against one of the world's most tyrannical and dangerous regimes. Australians want to know what it all means, and what was likely to come next. They got a Prime Minister who looked like he'd rather be anywhere else. It was clear from Mr Albanese's curt manner at his Monday morning press conference that he didn't want any part of US President Donald Trump's surprise attack on Iranian nuclear facilities. He said what he had to: that Iran could not be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons and that Australia was in support of actions to prevent that nightmare scenario. But Mr Albanese also stressed that Australia was not involved in this conflict. Five times, the Prime Minister said that this had been a 'unilateral action' by the US. And when asked directly, repeatedly, whether Australia was given any heads-up an action would occur prior to the bombs falling, Mr Albanese skirted the question. What he did say was that he had not spoken to Mr Trump since before last week's G7 summit, which the President left a day early, causing the planned sit-down between the two leaders to be abandoned. Australia-US relations have never been at a lower ebb. Mr Trump is a challenging character. And Mr Albanese isn't alone in his distaste for him. Successive polls have found Australians are among the world's biggest critics of him, finding him dangerous and untrustworthy. But this isn't about Donald Trump the man. This is about the fact that the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran is an intolerable one. Iran's regime is the antithesis to liberal democracy, obsessed with the destruction of Israel and of Western values. The decision by the US to join Israel in doing what needed to be done — despite Mr Trump's clear personal preference not to get involved in matters beyond his borders — was the right one. Contrast Mr Albanese's non-existent relationship with Mr Trump's administration with that of British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, who did get a heads-up about the US' intentions in Iran. Mr Albanese and Mr Starmer are ideological kin, sharing a leftist world view. Yet where Mr Albanese wears his repugnance towards Mr Trump on his sleeve, Mr Starmer makes it work. The result is a UK which is firmly within the Western alliance, and an Australia increasingly on its outer. Mr Albanese must make it his priority to repair Australia's deteriorating relationship with the US. That means we need an effective ambassador in Washington. While this is not intended as a Kevin Rudd-bashing exercise, it is apparent he is not that person. Shifting him out and finding the right person to serve Australia's interests in the Trump era is one step along the road to restoring our alliance. Responsibility for the editorial comment is taken by Editor-in-Chief Christopher Dore.
