House debates

Monday, 7 November 2022

Private Members' Business

Israel

12:10 pm

Photo of Julian LeeserJulian Leeser (Berowra, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Indigenous Australians) Share this | | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

(1) notes that:

(a) Israel, as a sovereign state, is free to decide its own capital; and

(b) for the last 3,000 years Jerusalem has not been the capital of any state other than a Jewish state, and has been the seat of government of Israel since 1950;

(2) recognises that the territory of West Jerusalem:

(a) has been part of Israel's sovereign territory since the state was established in 1948, and is not part of the territory which Israel captured during the 1967 war;

(b) is therefore outside the scope of United Nations (UN) resolutions since 1967, which are limited expressly to territory occupied by Israel since 1967; and

(c) has never been the subject of peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians;

(3) further notes that:

(a) Australia's recognition of West Jerusalem as Israel's capital in 2018 did not in any way pre-empt the outcome of peace negotiations, or undermine the prospects of achieving a peaceful settlement of the conflict based on the UN-endorsed principle of two states for two peoples; and

(b) since 2020 four Arab states have officially normalised relations with Israel, thereby disproving claims which were made in 2018 that recognition of West Jerusalem as Israel's capital would worsen the conflict; and

(4) calls on the Government to:

(a) reverse its recent decision to no longer recognise West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel;

(b) apologise to the Australian people for the lack of consultation or opportunity for public debate in the lead-up to the decision, and for effecting an important change of government policy through an amendment to a government website, and then officially denying the change, before a decision was taken by the Cabinet;

(c) apologise to Israel for this ill-considered decision, and the hasty and careless manner in which it was made; and

(d) apologise to the Australian Jewish community for the failure to consult and for announcing its decision on the Jewish Holy Day of Simchat Torah, when Jewish community organisations were precluded from responding.

I spent the last week in Israel, the Palestinian territories and the United Arab Emirates. The original purpose of my visit was to examine how the Abraham Accords are changing the Middle East for the better. The Abraham Accords put to death two canards of this debate: first, that there can be no peace between Israel and its Arab neighbours while the Israel-Palestinian issue remains unresolved; and second, that the central problem in the Middle East is Israel-Palestine. It's not. The real challenge in the Middle East is the export of terrorism and regional destabilisation by Iran, and the prevalence of failed states like Syria and Lebanon, which are being picked over by a range of terrorist organisations like ISIS and the Iranian-backed Hezbollah. Unfortunately, rather than celebrating the Abraham Accords, I was constantly having to confront the real sense of hurt that Israelis have about the Australian government's decision to reverse our policy on Jerusalem. Make no mistake, this was big news in Israel and it has damaged our relationship with a significant ally and the only democracy in the Middle East. I explained this was not a bipartisan decision and that a future coalition government will revert to recognising West Jerusalem as the capital.

Labor's decision-making was shambolic and wrong. Labor had three positions on this issue in 24 hours. There was no consultation with Israel, and the decision was announced on Simchat Torah. It is hard to think of a more chaotic piece of foreign policy-making in Australia. It was a decision that sends a bad message to all other countries with whom we have long-standing alliances and friendships. The decision was lauded by Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. You know you're making bad decisions when they are endorsed by listed terrorist organisations like those.

West Jerusalem has been part of Israel since 1948. It looks like every other capital city in the world. The Knesset—Israel's parliament—is there, the Supreme Court is there, the Prime Minister lives there and the President lives there. West Jerusalem is not a final status issue. I want to address the government's three justifications for its decision. First, they say the decision to not recognise Jerusalem had been the position of every government between 1967 and 2018. The simple answer to this proposition is to say that the previous policy was wrong. It was a pointless charade and, to me as a Jewish Australian, it was an offensive form of anti-Semitism, singling Israel out by pretending its capital was somewhere other than it actually was, which was finally corrected by the Morrison government. But when the correct decision has been made by an Australian government, it is no justification for the succeeding government to revert to the previous offensive position by saying that the correct position was out of step with those governments who were in error.

Second, Labor argue that the decision was out of step with a range of countries including France, Spain, South Korea, New Zealand, Germany, Japan, the EU, Singapore, Canada, the UK, Sweden, Finland and Norway. Well, Australia has its own independent foreign policy based on facts, principles and our national interest; it is not some form of groupthink. Third, they described the Morrison government's announcement as a political stunt. It was not a stunt; it was a policy decision made in an orthodox manner. Over two months between making the announcement that the government was considering recognising West Jerusalem as Israel's capital and the final decision, there were consultations led by the secretaries of PM&C, DFAT and Home Affairs. Community representatives and people closely involved in the Middle East peace process were involved. Prime Minister Morrison raised the issue with other world leaders personally in bilateral meetings. Compare that process with Labor's shambolic approach and one can only conclude that the reversal of this decision came about to appease extreme elements in the ALP.

On Israel, Labor speaks with a forked tongue. Before the election, Labor promised they were in lockstep with the coalition. The Attorney-General wrote in the Australian Jewish News:

Australia has for generations spoken with one voice in support of Israel. Labor’s own history of steadfast support for Israel extends back to well before the founding of the modern state in 1948.

… … …

The truth is that you do not have to look far to see the reality, and value, of bipartisanship when it comes to Israel.

Well, it took only a few months for Labor to demonstrate this was untrue. As Peter Wertheim from the Executive Council of Australian Jewry pointed out, the ECAJ's pre-election survey asked:

Please outline your party's policies on the recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital, including any additional measures it would take if elected to government.

In their answer, the position Labor put to the Jewish community going into the election made no mention that it would cease to recognise West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. As Peter Wertheim has written:

Significantly, there was no statement as previously, that Labor would reverse the Morrison government's decision. Was this misleading? It was certainly less than full disclosure.

It's time for the Albanese government to reverse their decision. If they don't, then the next coalition government will. Australia should not be making foreign policy in such a chaotic way, particularly when that policy alienates longstanding allies like Israel.

Photo of Ross VastaRoss Vasta (Bonner, Liberal Party) Share this | | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Photo of Aaron VioliAaron Violi (Casey, Liberal Party) Share this | | Hansard source

I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.

12:15 pm

Photo of Susan TemplemanSusan Templeman (Macquarie, Australian Labor Party) Share this | | Hansard source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this motion but not in support of it. It provides an opportunity in this place to restate the government's commitment to a two-state solution for Palestine and Israel and for there to be calm and thoughtful discussion rather than political pointscoring. I speak on this issue knowing how easily my words can be extracted and manipulated. I think it's in everyone's interests—particularly those who are suffering the consequences of a system that divides and segregates people depending on whether they're Jewish or Muslim—that we retain the context in which comments are made. We do need to recall the history that has led to us returning to a longstanding policy not to recognise West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, nor to have an intent to move our embassy to West Jerusalem.

While the timing and manner of the announcement was regrettable, it's a long-held Australian government policy. Since 1948, when the state of Israel was founded, successive Australian governments, no matter whether they were Labor or coalition, had a policy of not recognising West Jerusalem as Israel's capital. Until 2018, there was a strong bipartisanship on this matter. The Morrison government decision to reject bipartisanship followed a decision by then US President Donald Trump to recognise West Jerusalem as Israel's capital in 2017 and then to move the US embassy there the following year. In the heat of the Wentworth by-election, triggered by the resignation of former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, Prime Minister Morrison's decision to follow Trump's lead was announced. It was a decision dropped to the media by the Prime Minister on the same day he told the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and only a day after he told his foreign minister. I note that, in spite of a big splash announcement, the fine print recognised that the embassy would not actually move from Tel Aviv.

I have no interest in playing people against one another. My respect for both the Jewish community and the Palestinian people remains strong. Australia has always been a steadfast friend of Israel, being one of the first countries to formally recognise Israel under Labor Prime Minister Ben Chifley. We have long supported Palestinians, including by providing humanitarian support. Australia's development cooperation is a demonstration of our practical and genuine commitment to the Palestinian people and a recognition of the economic, health, education and social disadvantages they face.

But there is a desperate need to re-engage in the peace process. In the last month, a UN Middle East envoy said 2022 is looking to be the deadliest year for Palestinians living in the West Bank since the UN began keeping records of fatalities 17 years ago, with 32 Palestinians, including six children, killed by Israeli forces in the last month and 311 injured, while two Israeli forces personnel were killed and 25 Israeli civilians were injured by Palestinians. It is no wonder the Palestinian UN ambassador has urged the Security Council to do more to protect and promote the two-state solution.

In this motion, the member for Berowra states that:

… Australia's recognition of West Jerusalem as Israel's capital in 2018 did not in any way pre-empt the outcome of peace negotiations, or undermine the prospects of achieving a peaceful settlement of the conflict based on the UN-endorsed principle of two states for two peoples …

I see it differently. The Morrison government policy change caused conflict and distress, all for an attempt at short-term political game playing domestically. The status of Jerusalem, including West Jerusalem, is a final status issue that should be resolved as part of any peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian people.

Having visited Jerusalem in 2017 and walked that maze of narrow alleyways in the old quarter, having seen the history that fills its four quarters—Christian, Muslim, Jewish and Armenian—and having visited some of the city's most revered and holy sites, I know that this place should not be subject to snap political decisions during a by-election on the other side of the world. On that visit, many Jewish, Christian and Muslim leaders stressed to me their desire for peace and to be able to live side by side. So I support our decision on West Jerusalem, and lest there be any doubt let me restate: we support the recognition and right of Israel and Palestine to exist as two states within secure and internationally recognised borders.

12:20 pm

Photo of Paul FletcherPaul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Government Services and the Digital Economy) Share this | | Hansard source

I am very pleased to rise to strongly support this motion calling on the government to reverse its recent decision to no longer recognise West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and to apologise to the Australian people, to Israel and to the Australian Jewish community. This motion is necessary because of a shockingly poorly executed and fundamentally ill judged decision by the government. On 17 October, media reported that the Department of Foreign Affairs website had removed references to the recognition of West Jerusalem as Israel's capital and the commitment to move the embassy. A spokesman for Foreign Minister Penny Wong was asked for clarification and had this to say:

The former Government made the decision to recognise West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. No decision to change that has been made by the current government.

The very next day, the foreign minister announced at a press conference that Australia would reverse the recognition of West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

Extraordinarily and insultingly, the announcement occurred on the Jewish holy day of Simhath Torah and just two weeks before an election in Israel. The Minister for Foreign Affairs did not demonstrate how this abrupt reversal of position was in the national interest, and, indeed, what was particularly troubling about this decision was that it treated so many stakeholders with contempt. The Israeli ambassador was not informed of the decision before the announcement; the Israeli government was not informed. Israel's Prime Minister Lapid had this to say:

In light of the way in which this decision was made in Australia, as a hasty response to an incorrect report in the media, we can only hope that the Australian government manages other matters more seriously and professionally.

The Israeli government summonsed Australia's ambassador to Israel to explain the government's change in policy.

The Executive Council of Australia Jewry said the decision was made in 'a shoddy manner', was 'poor policy' and was 'no way to treat an ally'. It's interesting to note that members of the government themselves expressed disappointment, as did a former Labor member of this place, Michael Danby, who said the government's decision was 'chaotic' and 'unprofessional'. Of course, this decision was welcomed by some—by two listed terrorist organisations: Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. The Albanese Labor government has chosen to give comfort to those organisations at the same time as treating longstanding friends of Australia very poorly.

During the last election campaign, there was no mention by Labor of its plan to reverse this policy. On the contrary, elected senior Labor parliamentarians assured concerned stakeholders that, on the question of Israel, it didn't matter which way they voted. The now Attorney-General wrote in the Australian Jewish News, claiming that across domestic politics Australia 'spoke with one voice', and the member for Macnamara made similar claims on 18 March in the Australian Jewish News, saying that Australia's Jewish community should feel proud that its interests would be safeguarded 'irrespective of whoever forms government'. I have seen no apology from either the Attorney-General or the member for Macnamara for their involvement in this shameful misleading of a significant and respected community—the Australian Jewish community.

I contrast this very poor process with the careful process our former government followed in 2018. Then Prime Minister Morrison announced in December 2018 the decision that the Australian government would recognise West Jerusalem, the seat of the Knesset and many of the institutions of the government of Israel, as the capital of Israel, a decision which, of course, respected both a commitment to a two-state solution and longstanding respect for relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions. The then government committed to moving the Australian embassy to West Jerusalem when practical, in support of and after the final status determination of a two-state solution.

In making this decision, Australia acknowledged the aspirations of the Palestinian people for a future state with its capital in East Jerusalem, and the announcement was made following a detailed review and extensive consultation by the secretaries of the departments of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Foreign Affairs and Trade, Defence, and Home Affairs. The decision that the current government made recently was badly executed. It was fundamentally wrong. The coalition has no hesitation in calling on the government to reverse it.

12:26 pm

Photo of Tony ZappiaTony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | | Hansard source

I begin by commending the comments of the member for Macquarie a few moments ago. This matter was raised in a matter of public importance in the House of Representatives only a couple of weeks ago. It got no traction then, and this motion won't get any traction either. It won't get any traction, because the facts with respect to this whole issue are absolutely clear.

The decision initially by the Morrison government to relocate the Australian embassy to West Jerusalem and to follow in the footsteps of the USA was nothing but a cynical political manoeuvre in the lead-up to the Wentworth by-election in 2018—a manoeuvre which ultimately failed. After it failed, the Morrison government backed down on its decision anyway, and the embassy has remained in Tel Aviv ever since.

As the Minister for Foreign Affairs quite rightly pointed out in her press statement of October this year:

Today the Government has reaffirmed Australia's previous and longstanding position that Jerusalem is a final status issue that should be resolved as part of any peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian people.

The statement goes on to say:

Australia's embassy has always been, and remains, in Tel Aviv.

From some quick research I did, there are some 90 embassies in Israel, and 86 of them are in Tel Aviv. The four that are not include the American embassy and three other countries that have followed, obviously, in American footsteps. But 86 are in Tel Aviv, which means the global opinion is that that's where they ought to be.

I won't go into quotes from Australian Labor Party leaders over the years, but I'll quote from some of the Liberal leaders over the 70 or so years since the embassy was first established there. Prime Minister Howard, Prime Minister Abbott and Prime Minister Turnbull all accepted Tel Aviv as the place for the Australian embassy to be. Liberal Prime Minister Howard in a joint press conference with PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat in May 2000 said:

The statu s of Jerusalem is something that will be resolved by the parties in the discussion.

In other words, there needs to be further dialogue on that very issue. Liberal Foreign Minister Bishop said plainly, too:

Matters relating to Jerusalem are subject to final status negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority.

Even the Gorton government after the 1967 agreement did not recognise anything else but that.

It seems to me that, if you go through the decades, one government after the other in this country—in particular Liberal or coalition governments—have consistently accepted that Tel Aviv is the capital of Israel and that that's where our embassy should be. It was only the cynical attempt by the Morrison government that sought to change that.

When members opposite now come into the chamber and talk about the manoeuvres of this government, can I say: it was their own government that made a decision without, I understand, their foreign minister of the day even being aware, without any consultation and without any advice from the very departments that they should have sought advice from if they were going to make such a move. It is absolutely clear that it was a decision made with one purpose and one purpose only, and that was to try and win over the Jewish vote in the Wentworth by-election—a manoeuvre which not only failed then but ultimately resulted in the Morrison government having to reverse its own position on the matter.

The Labor Party and the government well understand that the position with respect to Jerusalem is one that will require a great deal of negotiation into the future. It is a matter that we understand is very important to both Israel and the Palestinian people. And it's a matter that will only be resolved by negotiation and dialogue. It won't be resolved by political tactics in this place, similar to those used by the Morrison government in 2018 and which are now being used again to try and justify this confected outrage about Labor's decision to simply do what has been done from day one, and that is to recognise Tel Aviv as the capital of Jerusalem, and that's where our embassy should be.

12:31 pm

Photo of Alex HawkeAlex Hawke (Mitchell, Liberal Party) Share this | | Hansard source

I rise to support this motion from my colleague the member for Berowra and to respond to some of the things that we're hearing from the Australian Labor Party and the government. Australia's voice internationally is well regarded. It's recognised as a voice for human and individual rights. And of course it speaks regularly, in a minority sense, for these high-moral-ground positions. The member for Makin is better than the argument that the Labor Party is making in saying that, because a majority thinks something, Australia should just do that. A majority of countries today—a newsflash for the Labor Party—deny Israel's right to exist. They have anti-Semitism embedded in their cultures and their thinking. Does that mean Australia's voice should join with a so-called majority of countries that happen to think that way? I don't believe so.

Thankfully, as a Western country, as a country dedicated to principles of freedom and individual human rights and liberty, Australia's voice has always been on the side of individual human rights, and it has stood strongly for Israel from the beginning of the modern nation of Israel because we understand that it has a right to exist—a right denied by many countries today. For the Labor Party to argue that we should join with the majority who happen to be wrong—morally wrong; reprehensibly wrong—about something, objectively, and that we should not be in a minority on human rights because human rights violators say that Israel should not exist, I think is fundamentally a weak argument and a weak position.

Further, for the Labor Party to suggest that, because they believe there was a political tactic a few years ago and, now they're in government, that's the reason they have made this change, is fundamentally incorrect as well. This is Labor's longstanding platform and belief. I accept that. This is not because of a political tactic by the Morrison government. It is embedded within the Labor Party. It is a dark chapter in the Labor Party's modern history—their attitude towards Israel and, subsequently, towards the Jewish people. It is a dark chapter. The evidence in Australia is compelling. It is growing. And I know that many of the members opposite feel strongly about this as well—that this dark chapter in the Labor Party's modern history does need to be tempered, because it is getting out of control. It is getting out of control now, when the government, with no consultation, makes this announcement. And they know full well the impact, diplomatically, this will have. This is not about Tel Aviv versus Jerusalem.

The member for Makin took us on a modern history lesson, but here's an ancient history lesson. From any cursory examination of Middle Eastern history, people understand why the issue of Jerusalem is so important to the Jewish people and why it will always be central to the Jewish religion and the state of Israel and its construct.

So, just because a number of countries say: 'We don't recognise your right to exist,' Australia should not join those voices. We believe they are wrong. We believe in the right principle: of standing setting up for a two-state solution. That has been the guiding principle of peace in the Middle East and the Australian government's position for a long time. And I don't believe it should change.

It is now being adjusted by the Labor Party—and it is being adjusted and undermined. They understand the timing and the impact this will have.

If the United States of America, regardless of who the president was, decided to take a bold step in favour of human and individual rights and the right for Israel to exist, then I believe Australia was right to support them and endorse them. I've always thought that. I've always believed it. From my studies in Middle Eastern history at university, I've always felt that Israel has a right to exist, that the Jewish people have a right to self-determination and that a two-state solution is the only basis for peace in the Middle East. It's the commonsense position, it's the position the United Nations endorses and it's something that should not be subject to politics—as members opposite have said. They know the impact of unravelling this. They understand that this is going to have a negative impact in the community.

The way it was done was brutal, and I understand that this does give licence to those in the Labor Party—and I don't mean the members opposite—who are part of the dark chapter in the modern Labor Party. The Jewish community in Australia knows it. Any casual observer know it. And we need to send signals to those people that they are not to be given licence to further unravel what is a consistent and reasonable policy position for Australia to take, which is that a two-state solution is best.

That's why I strongly support this motion from my colleague the member for Berowra. He and the member for Bradfield are people who are standing up. Many of the new members who've come from the teal side in the seats: listen to the voices of the people who represent these seats and listen to the voices of the community here in Australia. Our relationship with Israel and the Jewish people is so strong, so well rounded and so developed. We should not compromise that because Labor has some people within it who want to change the course of Australian history.

12:36 pm

Photo of Mike FreelanderMike Freelander (Macarthur, Australian Labor Party) Share this | | Hansard source

There's been a Jewish community in Australia since the very first days of European settlement, and I'm very proud that I'm descended from a Jewish community that came here in convict days. It's very important to me that our relationship with Israel is maintained on a positive note and that we continue to support Israel not just in its existence but in its growth as a 21st-century democracy. So I believe in the State of Israel.

However, those opposite would seek to undermine our relationship with the State of Israel by their unbelievably cynical approach to the issue of Jerusalem. It's worth noting a little bit of history. The State of Israel was first proclaimed by Israel's first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, in May 1948. Australia recognised the State of Israel in January 1949 and our embassy in Israel has been in Tel Aviv from that time. The Israeli embassy was established in Canberra at the same time—1949.

Those opposite are correct when they say that Jerusalem has incredible significance. It has incredible significance to Islam, to Christianity and to the Jewish people—and any dealing with the issue of Jerusalem has to take that into account. The way in which this has been politicised, initially by the Morrison government and, more recently, by those opposite—who can't even make up their mind and won't even give an opinion about what should happen to Australia's embassy in Israel—is nothing short of astounding. They are approaching issues in a cynical, political, manipulative and inappropriate way.

I fully support the Labor government and the Minister for Foreign Affairs in their decision to rescind the Morrison government's recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital and decision to move the embassy there. It was insulting to our Arab colleagues, it reduced the chances of there being a two-state solution, it implied a less than even-handed approach to peace in the Middle East and it reduced us to being little more than a vassal state of a Trumpian America. We should be ashamed of what happened, not celebrating it. Penny Wong and the Australia Labor government have made the right decision, there is no question. Labor has supported the State of Israel since the founding of the state and the initial appointment by Doc Evatt as the head of the UN Ad Hoc Committee on the Palestinian Question. Every opposition leader and Prime Minister from every Labor opposition and government ever since has supported the State of Israel. That is how it should be. That's what I believe in. I believe in a decent, even handed approach. I believe in the hope of eventual peace. The only realistic prospect of that is with a two-state solution.

Nothing makes me more disgusted with the cynical approach of the previous government than this issue. I believe, as Bob Hawke says, that, when the bell tolls for Israel, it tolls for all of us. Israel is an outstanding liberal democracy in the Middle East. They have at the present time a very conservative government and one that I don't always agree with, but I believe in the State of Israel. The only way that we as a government should be dealing with that is with an even handed approach. Even the Lowy Institute notes that the actions of the previous government, the Morrison government, were totally wrong and totally cynical.

12:41 pm

Photo of Allegra SpenderAllegra Spender (Wentworth, Independent) Share this | | Hansard source

I rise and support the motion moved by the member for Berowra. The government's decision to withdraw recognition of West Jerusalem was rushed and badly handled. It was poorly timed and without proper consultation. It ignores the fact that West Jerusalem has never been contested in any peace negotiations, and it has undermined our ability to play a constructive role in supporting a peaceful two-state resolution, which is so vital for the Israeli and Palestinian people. It is a decision the government should reverse and apologise for.

I want to make clear that I am a strong supporter for a two-state solution in the Middle East. I hope to see successful Israeli and Palestinian states living side by side in peace in my lifetime. Australia is home to refugees and migrants from across the region and from all sides of this dreadful conflict. Many of these people live and work in Wentworth, and so my community understands more than many the damage that this ongoing conflict has done and the important role that Australia must play in creating a peaceful future. Like so many people in Wentworth and across Australia, I have deep concern for the Palestinian people's suffering, and I unequivocally support them, but at the same time I unequivocally support Israel's right to exist in peace. But that does not mean I support all actions of the Israeli government. We must have peace, and all sides must play their part in creating it.

It has therefore never been more important to take actions that promote an enduring two-state solution in the Middle East. Unfortunately, the government's recent decision does not help. I'm deeply disappointed by the decision itself and by the process followed to make it. Labor has acknowledged that this decision was badly handled. Jewish community representatives were informed by the government on Monday 17 November that there would be no withdrawal of recognition. The next day the government did exactly the opposite. To make matters worse, the decision was announced on a Jewish holy day, meaning community leaders could not respond. It was poorly handled at the diplomatic level. The government of course has the right to change policy, and I recognise that in opposition Labor had expressed these views, but it's also fair to expect the government to consult with communities and work respectfully with other countries even if it's a policy that the other country may not like.

Sadly, this is not the first time that this issue has been poorly handled by the Australian government. Let's be honest: Scott Morrison's decision to bring the Israeli capital into the 2018 Wentworth by-election was a cynical political decision designed to win votes on the day before my community went to the polls. But, whilst the former government's decision was cynically timed, I do believe it is right for Australia to recognise West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. West Jerusalem has been part of Israel since 1948, when the country was established. It has never been contested in any peace negotiations. Its status has never been on the table. It has always been within the green line and is not part of the territories which Israel occupied in the 1967 war. There has never been a resolution at the UN calling on Israel to withdraw from West Jerusalem. It is not a contested space. Finally, there is no clear evidence that Australia's recognition of West Jerusalem has, in any way, undermined peace negotiations, as has been alleged by others. In fact, since 2018 when Australia took this action, five Arab states have officially normalised relationships with Israel.

We cannot pretend that the road to peace is a straightforward one, and we must acknowledge that there will be missed steps and false starts along the way. But the difficulty of the issues at hand does not excuse the blunder that the government has made. We must and we can do better.

A division having been called in the House of Representatives—

Sitting suspended from 12:45 to 16: 12