Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal National Party, Shadow Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Criminal and Migration Laws) Bill 2026. I want to open by using that old Irish phrase 'if I wanted to get to Dublin, I wouldn't have started here'. That sums up the government's handling of antisemitism since 7 October 2023. In the wake of the Bondi Beach tragedy, the coalition called for serious, collaborative, decisive and targeted action to confront antisemitism and radical Islamic extremism. What Australians were given instead was a rushed, sprawling and incoherent omnishambles of a bill. Stakeholders were given barely 48 hours to make submissions to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security. The PJCIS is an important committee of this parliament that was tasked by the PM to conduct what could only be described as a sham inquiry. The committee's report was only tabled this morning, making the committee's process an absolute farce.

That approach was completely inappropriate for legislation of this scale and consequence, cutting across democratic principles and national security. Rather than protecting Jewish Australians, the original bill risked shielding radical Islamic extremists. Rather than stopping hate, it threatened to chill legitimate political and religious debate. Ultimately, the government was forced to abandon its approach. That collapse reflects a broader pattern. When it comes to antisemitism and radical Islamic extremism, this government either dithers or it bungles.

This failure did not begin at Bondi. For more than two years, despite repeated warnings from the Jewish community, intelligence agencies and law enforcement and despite a clear and alarming rise in antisemitism, the government sat on its hands. Rather than confronting antisemitism when it mattered, the government appeased extremist protesters, abandoned the State of Israel, left Jewish Australians feeling isolated and then sat on the recommendations of its own Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism for almost six months without implementation. When legislative action finally came, it did not come from moral leadership; it came because the government was dragged into action under sustained pressure from the community, grieving families and this parliament. That is why we are here today, dealing not with a comprehensive or considered response but with a narrower bill salvaged from that failure.

I now turn to the criminal law provisions that remain before the House and which we support, in principle—subject to the safeguards and amendments we've sought, to ensure these measures are targeted, proportionate and lawful. Schedule 1, part 1 introduces new aggravated offences for religious, spiritual or other leaders who provide religious instruction or pastoral care, applying to the existing offence of threatening force or violence under part 5.1 of the Criminal Code. Religious leaders occupy a position of trust and authority. With that influence comes a higher duty of care and a greater responsibility. This is a sensible and overdue deterrent, particularly against radical Islamic preachers and other figures who exploit religious settings to radicalise, groom and incite violence. The message must be unmistakable: abusing religious authority and using the pulpit to threaten force or violence will attract serious criminal consequences. Importantly, we ensured that this provision captures anyone who stands up in a religious setting and promotes extremist violence, whether or not they hold a formal religious title.

Part 2 increases penalties from two to five years for using postal or similar services to menace or harass. It's another commonsense measure that recognises that hate does not always occur in person.

Part 3 introduces a sentencing principle requiring courts to treat hatred based on race or national or ethnic origin as an aggravating factor. This sends a clear signal that crimes motivated by antisemitic hatred will be punished more severely.

Part 5 introduces aggravated grooming offences, targeting adults who radicalise or recruit children, including through online platforms. Radical Islamic extremism does not emerge overnight; it is cultivated through grooming, indoctrination and manipulation. Addressing that reality requires a proportionate and necessary response to people who abuse their special position of authority as a religious or spiritual leader, or those who target minors.

Part 6 strengthens hate-symbol offences by lowering the fault element to 'recklessness', extending prohibitions to symbols of prohibited hate groups and providing police with powers to seize symbols and order their removal online. These changes reflect reality. Hate symbols are not neutral expressions. Supporting these measures is entirely consistent with the coalition's longstanding position. But it should not have taken Bondi for the government to act.

Part 4 establishes a new regime for listing prohibited hate groups who engage in, prepare for, assist or advocate hate crimes relating to race or national or ethnic origin. This regime is designed to address a real gap in Australia's national security framework. Groups like Hizb ut-Tahrir glorify terrorism and act as incubators for Islamic extremist radicalisation yet have not met the threshold required for terrorist listing. That gap has also been exploited by Neo-Nazi organisations, allowing them to operate openly, to recruit and fundraise and to radicalise supporters, while remaining technically lawful. The prohibited hate group regime is designed to close that gap.

While Hizb ut-Tahrir has sought to portray itself as a non-violent ideological movement, its record demonstrates a very different reality. That includes consistent promotion of antisemitic hatred, public praise for the October 7 attacks and a well-documented role in acting as a conveyor belt to terrorism worldwide, with former adherents or supporters progressing into terrorist organisations. Hizb ut-Tahrir has been banned or restricted in multiple jurisdictions, including being terrorist-listed in the UK.

Following Bondi, there is a pressing need for Australia to act. These groups contributed to the climate of hatred and radicalisation that resulted in Bondi. The regime provides a practical and immediate mechanism to act, where inaction is no longer acceptable. In that context, it is a necessary response to the clear and present threat of radical Islamic extremism to the peace, order and good government of the Commonwealth.

Turning to the migration amendments, schedule 2 makes amendments to the Migration Act to expand the character grounds on which the Minister for Home Affairs may refuse or cancel a visa. These new grounds relate to hate-motivated conduct and offences involving the spread of hatred and extremism where the minister is satisfied of the relevant considerations. Part 2 provides that a person whose visa is refused or cancelled on these grounds may also be subject to a permanent exclusion period unless the decision is revoked or the minister personally intervenes.

These amendments are sensible in principle. They give the minister clearer authority to refuse visas to people who pose a genuine risk to public safety, including radical extremists. But there is a glaring omission. The provisions do not expressly refer to radical Islamic extremism or antisemitism, despite this being the stated focus of the bill.

While these measures are an improvement, we cannot ignore the government's record. This is the same government that allowed individuals from Gaza to enter Australia without adequate vetting, while cancelling the visas of democratically elected Israeli members of parliament. That sent a deeply troubling signal about what conduct is tolerated and what views are punished. These powers must not become a political weapon used against our allies or against voices the government simply disagrees with. They must be confined to their stated purpose—dealing with radical Islamic extremists and those who promote antisemitism—not punishing lawful political expression.

The measures before us today are ones that could and should have been taken after 7 October 2023. Instead, the government delayed, it dithered and it ultimately produced a failed omnishambles bill that had to be dismantled. There is much more to do if we are to stamp out antisemitism once and for all, and no-one in this place would suggest that what we are putting together today is a set-and-forget solution with nothing further to do.

While it's prudent to await the royal commission's findings, that has never been an excuse for inaction, particularly when clear recommendations already exist. Within days of the Bondi attack, the coalition's Taskforce on Antisemitism, Extremism and Counter-Terrorism put forward targeted, practical measures, including implementing the special envoy's plan, strengthening counterterrorism laws, stripping citizenship from terrorists and hate preachers, and ending Labor's reckless policy of self-managed returns for ISIS brides. Taking those steps earlier would have reassured Jewish Australians and strengthened the safety of all Australians.

It is time for the government to put politics aside and confront antisemitism and radical Islamic extremism with seriousness and resolve. The coalition will continue to fight for the safety of Jewish Australians, and all Australians, and I call on the government to finally do the same.

See this speech in context