Senator Chandler, I don't believe it is disputed, at the point where we are in Gaza, that the UNRWA is the only entity on the ground that is able to deliver aid and humanitarian relief at scale. The Israeli government officials with whom I spoke would accept that. It may be that people don't like the entity, and I appreciate that that is where you are coming from, but I don't think it is disputed that there is no other organisation that is capable of delivering assistance in that way. That is consistent with the discussions I had in Israel and consistent with the discussions I have had with officials of the UN and also the International Committee of the Red Cross. On that basis, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper.
]]>In relation to the letter from community representatives, I would make the point that I am aware of that letter. I do know these are not new views. They're views that have been expressed for many years by individuals and organisations who do not support the Australian government continuing to fund UNRWA. By the time we received the letter, my officials had already acted on the issues it raised, which had been identified in a November report by UN Watch, as you said, and the Institute for Monitoring Peace and Cultural Tolerance in School Education. (Time expired)
]]>I would make the point that the government, as DFAT said in estimates, have agreements with UNRWA that prohibit Hamas or any other terrorist organisations from receiving funding. These requirements are closely monitored and applied by DFAT. I also would say to you—and I'll provide further information when I find it—that further consideration by the department did occur in the context, I think, of the 2022-23 budget.
What I would say to you is this: there are two very clear facts about UNRWA. The first is that UNRWA is the only organisation capable of delivering assistance into Gaza. And, in a context where you have 400,000 Palestinians starving, a million facing starvation and 1.7 million people displaced, that does matter. The other irrefutable fact is that serious allegations have been raised, which is why the government has paused funding and is engaging with UNRWA and with partners, including in the context of the investigations which have been raised. (Time expired)
]]>Well, Senator Whish-Wilson, I don't think anybody, regardless of their political persuasion, can suggest that some of the actions which were commented on by the judge are appropriate. So I do take that view. I understand that the minister has written to the CEO of the EDO, making clear that the expectation is that the office act ethically and professionally, and that the minister has asked her department to ensure that the EDO's conduct is in accordance with their grant agreement.
]]>An honourable senator: That's not the question.
It was an answer to the first question. Notwithstanding the fact that you assert something else publicly, Senator Shoebridge, it is the answer that I have been advised by the department. In relation to the second, this is where there is a difference between the government and the Greens. We do not have a policy of boycotting all exports to Israel. I appreciate that is the position that you are seeking, but we do not have a policy of disengaging from Israel economically. I appreciate you have a different view—
]]>On Monday night, more of the Liberals' and Nationals' self-serving attitudes were exposed. Mr Turnbull said, 'The former government treated Australia as a plaything.' Senator Reynolds said, 'People were blackmailed and threatened into supporting Mr Dutton,' and Mr Morrison said, 'Mr Dutton was seen as a great intolerant threat to the moderates.' I don't think we have to say much more than what they say about themselves. We on this side do the right thing for the right reasons, and we always will.
]]>After the government said it would deliver tax cuts, Senator Cash said they would 'oppose tax cuts' and Senator Birmingham said they were not going to be supporting Labor—because their reflex is always to oppose, even if it means they are not supporting Australians. Of course, if those opposite had considered the detail and the facts—that Labor's plan benefits every single Australian taxpayer and that it puts more money into the pockets of hardworking Australians—then maybe the Leader of the Opposition wouldn't have been so humiliated on national television last night.
The reason the opposition have had to support these tax cuts is that they know in their heart of hearts it's the right thing to do. They know Labor has done the right thing. They know Labor's tax cuts will deliver bigger tax cuts for more Australians, and more Australians will be better off as a result. (Time expired)
]]>Before I ask that further questions be placed on notice, I wonder if the Senate would indulge me. I'm pleased to inform the Senate that present in the gallery today are a number of journalists from across South-East Asia who are visiting Australia ahead of the ASEAN-Australia Special Summit in March, and I take the opportunity to welcome them to the Senate on behalf of the government and, I'm sure, by extension, all of those in the chamber. Selamat datang.
Honourable senators: Hear, hear!
I ask that further questions be placed on notice.
]]>