Michelle Rowland (Greenway, Australian Labor Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

Bondi attack and antisemitism

14 December 2025 will be marked in history as one of Australia's most horrific and most tragic.

Fifteen innocent lives were lost, many more injured, and a national conscience was left forever scarred.

This Thursday, 22 January, will be observed as a national day of mourning.

Flags will fly at half-mast, and Australians will pause to honour the victims and reflect on the courage and compassion shown in the face of unimaginable horror.

Australia's many diverse communities are connected through generations by an invisible string that binds them to the culture, practices and beliefs of those who came before them. This vein of history brings richness and a sense of identity but, when confronted with hate, can be a source of trauma and pain of memory.

Australia is proudly home to a significant population of Holocaust survivors.

Many of those attending the Hanukkah event survived, or were descendants of those who survived, that darkest period of modern history.

They stood side by side with others who had fled persecution.

They came to Australia seeking safety, a refuge from this most insidious hatred, seeking a community that saw their Jewish heritage as a contributor to the richness of the Australian character.

That sense of safety has been shattered.

As a community, as Australians, it is our responsibility to rebuild that trust.

The violent terrorist attack we saw in Bondi did not occur spontaneously. Violent extremism starts with words, words of hate spread throughout the community by pernicious individuals and organisations.

This hatred is corrosive to a multicultural democratic society.

This bill targets those that support violence, in particular violence targeted at a person because of their immutable attributes.

This conduct is criminal, but, more than that, it is the seed of extremism, the roots of terrorism.

It must be stamped out with the full force of the law.

Organisations that proffer these hateful ideologies must be outlawed and their composite members held accountable. Indeed, some of the cowards who spread hate as part of one such group have announced they will be disbanding in anticipation of the effectiveness of these laws.

Those that seek to exploit their position of trust, or radicalise our youth, must be met with serious penalties.

Visitors to our country who espouse these hateful views must be removed.

We must take our responsibility as a parliament to stamp out hate incredibly seriously.

Government response

The government has announced a Royal Commission on Antisemitism and Social Cohesion to examine the roots of hatred and division and to strengthen the bonds that hold our society together.

But we cannot wait for its findings to act. Waiting a year gives in to the very people this bill seeks to target and leaves the safety of Australians exposed.

Today, the government introduces the Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Criminal and Migration Laws) Bill 2026—a legislative package designed to combat hate, dismantle extremist networks and prevent violence before it occurs.

Criminal amendments

This bill will increase penalties for those advocating or threatening violence against groups because of their protected attributes.

It will also ensure even greater penalties are available for those that exploit their position of trust as a religious official or other leader to spread violent extremism, or seek to radicalise children.

The bill will introduce an aggravated sentencing factor for Commonwealth offences motivated by hatred based on race or national or ethnic origin.

Courts will be required to consider hate motivation when sentencing, ensuring any sentence acknowledges the additional harm to society caused.

The bill will introduce a new framework to allow certain organisations to be listed as prohibited hate groups where they engage in hate crimes, or support or advocate the commission of these offences.

These groups which seek to spread hate, fuel division, and stoke violence, have avoided criminality for too long. They have no place in our society and this bill will provide the government with a mechanism to outlaw them, and to criminalise their activities.

In relation to the definition of a hate crime at subsection (5), the government confirms that the provision is directed at serious conduct or the threat of serious conduct of a criminal nature.

As noted in the explanatory memorandum, the bill does not capture conduct, or the threat of conduct, that includes being subjected to any force or impact that is within the limits of what is acceptable in everyday social interaction or to life in the community. It must be serious harm to a criminal standard under the current law.

For the avoidance of doubt, this provision does not trespass into legitimate free speech, including the implied freedom of political communication. It does not seek to capture lawful debate, robust criticism, religious discussion, or genuine political advocacy. It does not target legitimate comedy, satire, or artistic expression.

What it does target is serious conduct of a serious nature, whether occurring in Australia or overseas, where the director-general of ASIO must be satisfied the conduct would, or is likely to, increase the risk of politically motivated violence or promote communal violence. That threshold is deliberately high. It ensures the definition is tied to security risk and public safety, not mere commentary, and not mere offence.

The line is drawn where it should be drawn: at serious harm—harm of a kind that meets a criminal standard threshold. Harm by an organisation that impacts national security—that is the director-general's concern. That is the test. Not discomfort. Not disagreement. Not merely, 'I didn't like what was said.'

Two years ago, this government introduced offences for the public display of Nazi and terrorist organisation symbols. These symbols are representative of, and are used to convey, ideologies of hatred, violence and racism which are incompatible with Australian values.

This bill will strengthen these offences and associated police powers to ensure greater operational effectiveness, including expanding the offences to capture symbols of any prohibited hate groups that are listed under the new framework.

Migration amendments

The Australian government remains committed to protecting the community from the risk of harm posed by noncitizens who engage in hate motivated conduct or offences relating to the spread of hatred and extremism.

The current character framework is a key component of Australia's migration system, protecting the community from the risks posed by noncitizens with criminal histories or criminal intent, as well as noncitizens who may vilify a segment of the Australian community, incite discord or otherwise threaten public health, safety or good order.

The bill will strengthen the legislative framework in the Migration Act by introducing specific grounds to enable the refusal or cancellation of a visa, if a noncitizen:

These new grounds will expressly capture conduct that spreads hatred and extremism, including in circumstances where a hate crime may have been committed, but there has been no criminal justice outcome.

The bill will also amend the Migration Regulations so that if a noncitizen is refused a visa on character grounds, they are subject to the same permanent exclusion from Australia that currently applies when a visa is cancelled on character grounds.

Together these amendments will strengthen the character framework and ensure that when a noncitizen is involved in spreading hatred and division, their visa may be refused or cancelled.

This bill did not come together on its own. To that end, I acknowledge the constructive engagement of the Jewish community, legal representatives, members of civil society and other advocates who helped shape the development of this bill. Your feedback has been thoughtful and considered.

I also acknowledge the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security for its scrutiny of the exposure draft that led to this bill and recognise the tireless work of the secretariat who supported the inquiry.

Finally, I acknowledge the work of the Attorney-General's Department, the Department of Home Affairs, and the Office of Parliamentary Counsel who crafted this bill with expertise and care.

This bill should not be a moment for division or political pointscoring. This is a moment for national unity.

The colour of someone's skin or the god they pray to is not determinative of their worth.

Legislation alone cannot rid prejudice from people's minds.

Hate spreads, it fosters, it takes root, every time it is not called out.

It is our collective responsibility to stamp out this hatred wherever we see it.

Our nation is strongest when we choose respect over division, and we must continue to invest in a community where everyone belongs, where everybody can thrive.

The passage of the Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Criminal and Migration Laws) Bill will be a decisive step forward in achieving this.

It will send a loud and unequivocal message to all corners of this country that we must stand united in the face of racial hatred.

But, more importantly, passage of this bill will send a message that light will prosper over darkness.

The passage of this bill will give us hope that Australia will continue to be a place of tolerance and that our diversity can be displayed with pride.

I commend the bill to the chamber.

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal National Party, Shadow Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to 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.

Jerome Laxale (Bennelong, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak in support of the Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Criminal and Migration Laws) Bill 2026. I do so not just as a member of this government but as a local MP who has seen at close range what hate is and what hate does to members of my community.

Bennelong is one of the most multicultural electorates in the country. It's a community where people of different faiths, cultures and backgrounds live side by side and contribute to our shared Australian story. But, despite our diversity and despite our prosperity, hate emerges from time to time. These laws today are designed to target that hate, because when hate and extremism emerge in a community like mine, they are felt immediately. They divide my community, and they make communities feel unsafe.

Over recent years, I've spoken directly with Jewish Australians in Bennelong who are feeling increasingly unsafe in ways they never expected to feel in this country. Parents have spoken about their children being targeted. Young people have spoken about hiding their identity, and students have spoken about feeling isolated and unsupported. This reality must be named clearly. Antisemitism is not vague. It is specific, it is persistent and it causes real harm.

Yesterday, members of parliament from all sides named that hate clearly in this House. I'll single out a contribution from my friend and neighbour the member for Berowra, who spoke very powerfully about the need to confront these threats head-on. On many elements of his speech, I agree with him. Taking on Nazis and Islamic fundamentalists is something this parliament must do with conviction and with haste, and that is what this law intends to do.

Even in Bennelong—beautiful, diverse and safe Bennelong—we have seen the real-world impact of hateful activities. Too regularly, white supremacist material finds its way into local letterboxes. Too often people in my community, where I live and raise my family, are targeted not because of chance but because of what they look like and what they believe in. In Marsfield more than half of the residents speak a language other than English at home. In Eastwood nearly half of the community identifies as having Chinese heritage. The vile material they receive is not distributed to persuade or debate; it is distributed to threaten, to signal that they are not welcome in their own home. That is how organised hate operates. It seeks to fracture social cohesion by creating fear across communities, normalising division and emboldening those who thrive on hate. This is where the real risk lies. Hate cannot be allowed to organise, because it will be normalised. The more it becomes organised the more it becomes visible, and when that happens it's not institutions that absorb the damage; it is people. Hate does not begin with violence, but all violence begins with hate.

On 14 December last year, Australia was forced to confront the reality of hate-inspired Islamic extremist violence, when the deadliest terrorist attack on our soil occurred at Bondi Beach. It's a place associated with everyday life, community and joy, and it became the site of a devastating loss. That moment shattered any lingering belief that this kind of violence and hate could not happen here. Disgustingly, in the days and weeks following Bondi, more hate was distributed in my community of Bennelong—again, material designed to threaten and divide. It was redacted and shared on our local Love Gladesville group, and I'm so proud that my local community called it out. Sara said, 'These views are not welcome in my home or my country.' Aiden said that these groups are 'an enemy of peace'. Martin hit the nail on the head when he said, 'We need to send a very strong message that their BS and lies are not tolerated and these dropkicks are not welcome in our community.' To Martin, Sara and Aiden: this bill is that strong message.

This legislation strengthens penalties for those who incite hatred and violence. It provides law enforcement with clearer tools to intervene earlier. It criminalises organised hate groups that exist to radicalise, recruit and intimidate. It holds leaders and authority figures to account when they abuse positions of trust to spread hate, and it recognises and criminalises the serious harm caused when adults deliberately radicalise children. I support this legislation, as should everyone in this place.

Julian Leeser (Berowra, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yesterday I stood here and said that the Bondi terrorist attack represented a moment of choice—a choice about the type of country we are and the type of people we want to be, a choice about whether we stay in the political cul-de-sac that we've been in for over 800 days or, instead, tackle the sources and causes of antisemitism in this country, a choice about whether to continue to treat antisemitism as just another political issue or to treat it as the moral and cultural problem it is, a choice made by people in this place about whether to drag heels or to deal with the issue with priority, alacrity and zealous determination, a choice by each member of this place about whether to change. The sad reality is that if we don't change then Bondi won't have changed anything.

Until recently Australia had an exceptional and unique story to tell about its Jewish community. Jews have been part of the story of Australia since the First Fleet. Australia came to be seen as a unique place good to the Jews. In turn, Jewish Australians have contributed to their country—famous names, like Monash, Isaacs, Lowy and Jessica Fox, and everyday people, with acts of service and gratitude that come from people living lives of peace and security. The grief from Bondi is twofold: it's not just the innocence lost, the families broken and the children scared and afraid; it's also the loss of the precious truth that Australia is good to Jews and the bitter sense that Bondi was predictable—we were warned.

There were 800 days of warning signs between October 7 and 14 December, starting on 8 October in Sydney with the public rally where the day of kidnapping, murder, rape and torture of Jews was called 'a day of pride' and 'a day of victory', and exemplified in the occupation of the opera house the next day with chants of 'gas the Jews'; in the incidents where people drove around Melbourne looking for Jews to kill; in the countless acts of graffiti in our capital cities calling for Jews to be gassed and murdered; in the encampments at our universities where Jewish students and staff were harassed; in the endless week-after-week protests in our cities calling for the destruction of Israel and occupying our landmarks; in the sophistry and lies of the academic and intellectual class, who justified abuse by saying that it wasn't antisemitism but anti-Zionism and that they weren't enabling antisemitism but just arguing for peace; in the doxxing and deplatforming of Jewish artists and creatives; in the smashing of Jewish shops and businesses; in the physical assaults on identifiably Jewish people; in the firebombing of cars; in the attacks on the synagogues at East Melbourne, Caulfield, Perth, Hobart, Newtown and Allawah; and, of course, in the firebombing of the Adass Israel synagogue. The Jewish community has seen this movie before, and we know how it ends. It ends in murder at Bondi after 800 days of failure.

Antisemitism is an old hatred that wears different masks. First it was about religion. Then it was about race. Now it is about the Jewish state. But the hatred is always the same, and the result is always the same. And now that hatred has come here, to our country.

The government has been warned about these things by its own antisemitism envoy, whose report was untouched for six months. We know that antisemitism is found in three groups—among Neo-Nazis who revel in the atrocities of the Holocaust, in the radical Islamists who take pride in October 7, and in the cultural left who foster and enable breeding grounds for hatred in our writers festivals, in artistic circles, on university campuses and in the so-called progressive organisations usually pretending to be about Zionism but mixed in with platitudes about human rights.

As I said, Bondi represents a moment of choice, and the choice the Liberal Party makes this morning, as we have always done, is to stand with the Jewish community and law-abiding Australians. It's the choice to be constructive, to pass this legislation as a step in the right direction. That's the choice the Liberal Party has made. But the choice for the government of the day does not end today. The choice for the Albanese government is in the implementation. The test for the government is how it uses these new laws. It must expel or jail hate preachers. It must list Hizb ut-Tahrir and its prayer halls. It must protect our borders from radical Islamists and the insidious propagandists who use Jews as a way of attacking Australia. It's a choice that doesn't end with these laws. The government must root out antisemitism from our schools, from academia and the universities, from the arts, from the trade union movement and from its own political base. Unless we do that, Bondi will not be the end of the story; it will be the midpoint of a story that gets so much worse.

Josh Burns (Macnamara, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I listened carefully to my friend the member for Berowra's speech on the Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Criminal and Migration Laws) Bill 2026. For all of us who have lived antisemitism over the last two years, this is an incredibly difficult moment in our country's history and for our community. I take the words the member for Berowra said seriously. I have never sought to politicise antisemitism and I will work and stand by anyone, from any part of this House or from any part of politics, in order to get things done to protect our community. But the bills that will pass this parliament, hopefully, with the support of the coalition, are not the full set of bills that should have passed this parliament today.

The member for Berowra is quite right in saying that antisemitism should be confronted in more than just the way these bills present today. But the truth of the matter is that the vilification clauses that were originally attached to these bills had to be taken out because the Liberal Party refused to support serious vilification laws in this place. That came after the Leader of the Opposition came to my electorate last week, stood up in a synagogue and said that hate needed to be confronted and that there needed to be consequences. She said that, if she were the prime minister, there would be. Within hours, the Liberal Party refused to support laws in this place that would do exactly that. If you break down what the Leader of the Opposition said—that, if she were the prime minister, there would be consequences for hate—there is not going to be an election for over two years. So the Leader of the Opposition is actually saying that she's not going to look at tackling hate or antisemitism in Australia for 2½ years—not while we are government and not before the next election. The Jewish community shouldn't have to wait that long for the Leader of the Opposition to do what she said she wanted to do inside a synagogue last week.

The Leader of the Opposition and the Liberal Party, after Bondi, were very quick to stand up and do press conferences, talking about how the recommendations of the Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism should be adopted in full and that the Liberal Party supported them in full. Let me read recommendation 3.2 of the special envoy's report:

You cannot claim to support the special envoy and then refuse to support the very recommendation that the special envoy put forward in her report, but that is exactly what the Liberal Party has done. Make no mistake; as a result of the Liberal Party's refusal to support the serious vilification laws, hate will not have consequences, and instances of hate will not have the consequences that we wanted to put into legislation today. That is because of the Liberal Party. They are the ones who will have to answer to the community.

I completely accept that more could have and should have been done. I accept responsibility for the way in which our country and the community has felt, and I am deeply, deeply sad about the state of Jewish life in Australia. But it is not an excuse to then not try to do everything in our power to confront it, today and tomorrow and into the future. We all have to be humble about this.

The fact of the matter is that, even late last night, a bunch of Jewish kids in my electorate who were dressed in religious Jewish garb were chased down the street and screamed at just for being who they are. Incitement, vilification and hatred—all of which would be criminal offences had the Liberal Party been willing to support what they said they were willing to support when they were inside a synagogue. It's all well and good to be strong in a press conference and it's all well and good to call your political opponents weak, but what actually matters is that we are strong in this place and that we put legislation in place in order to protect the communities who are affected by it.

The Jewish community also has said that the vilification clauses shouldn't just be around race and that they should go to everyone because everyone deserves equal protection before the law, and of course that is true. No-one should suffer vilification. No-one should suffer hate. No-one should suffer because of incitement.

It is just an absolute shame that we come in here today and the full suite of laws aren't what they should be, because the Liberal Party refuse to support the very things that they said they supported. But these bills as they stand will have a significant impact, and I commend them to the House.

Monique Ryan (Kooyong, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The terrorist attack in Bondi on 14 December 2025 shocked our country, and it utterly traumatised the Australian Jewish community. In its wake, our country needed our leaders to stand together with resolution and unity. Instead, our leaders have largely failed us in the last four weeks.

The immediate politicisation of a mass murder, by the opposition, which attacked the Prime Minister and which immediately chose to punch down on immigrants, disgusted many people in the community that I represent. The opposition's strident calls for the immediate return of parliament, followed very soon after by complaints about the early return of parliament, were confounding.

The government initially vacillated on the need for a royal commission and then proposed broad, sweeping legislation on critical areas—the Criminal Code, migration law and gun control—without the judicious consultation and review that would ensure the confidence and support of our constituents. Civil liberty and community groups were given 48 hours to provide, to the parliamentary committee, submissions on a 144-page bill, with the final report being released just this morning. While I consulted constituents on the bill last week, the government decided to fold to pressure over the weekend, announcing wholesale changes without including our communities. The legislation now before the House was first seen by us less than an hour ago. We have been given five minutes to speak to it. This is unacceptable.

Australians want us to get this right. Poor policymaking will not reassure our electorates. It won't make our constituents safer. Terrorism is not just an attack on our lives; it is an attack on our confidence, on our idea that the democracy we live in can remain both secure and free. Legislation on the run will never engender confidence in our processes or our government.

In the last week, I've heard from many constituents who are rightly concerned that this legislation has been introduced and moved too quickly, with insufficient opportunity for community consultation or parliamentary scrutiny. They want us to undertake careful, rights based, non-reactive lawmaking. They want clear definitions, robust scrutiny and protections for democratic freedoms, including those for protest and advocacy. The concern from many in our community, and in the findings of the parliamentary report that was released this morning, is that the speed with which this bill has been drafted and the potential broad application of many of its provisions could have a chilling effect on legitimate debate on political, social and religious issues. The speed with which this legislation has been developed means that legal inconsistencies and unintended consequences seem inevitable.

The bill does include measures that I and my community support. I support the government's move to include tougher penalties for hate crimes. I commend the government on taking action to constrain the radical hate groups that divide and harm us. I welcome new aggravated offences for community leaders who choose to incite violence. This morning I supported measures to improve the control of firearms in this country. But there are things that we're not debating today that we should be talking about. We're not protecting all Australians from serious vilification based on race, religion, gender, sexual orientation or other characteristics. Hatred doesn't discriminate based on those characteristics, and neither should the law. The need for these protections was agreed on by the Jewish community, the Australian Human Rights Commission and Equality Australia, but the government has caved on this issue to a coalition that is in ethical and political freefall. The removal of racial vilification elements from this legislation renders it less likely to be effective in its aim of banning hate groups.

The government has further watered down the bill overnight to ensure it can be passed today, but we don't have to pass this law today. We could consult with our communities, faith groups and human rights and legal experts and get this right. The government is letting politics be the enemy of policy. If the legacy of Bondi is a memory of division and inadequacy, then we will have failed this country. Yesterday so many of us spoke in this House of our great sadness at the tragic loss of 15 Australian lives. We have a unique opportunity with this legislation to make the greatest of differences on their behalf. If we don't do that, it will be a moment of darkness for this country, and it will reflect poorly on us all.

Ash Ambihaipahar (Barton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is no secret that we are seeing a rise in antisemitism, hatred and extremism in this country, and, more recently, the nation experienced its darkest day, at Bondi Beach in December last year. The Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Criminal and Migration Laws) Bill is part of our response to this horrific event and a piece in the puzzle of restoring social cohesion in our wonderful nation.

There are key reforms presented in this bill that I want to highlight because a few constituents have reached out to me with claims about the bill's effects that are untrue and inflammatory. Such claims stem from online disinformation and, sometimes, from those across the chamber. I'm glad we've come together as a parliament to make these changes. Let's be clear about what they do and not fall into a dangerous echo chamber that seeks only to divide this nation.

Firstly, there's the introduction of a new aggravated offence for preachers and leaders and for adults radicalising children. Where these actors advocate for violence against others, they will face penalties of up to 12 years of imprisonment.

Secondly, the bill will significantly increase penalties for hate crimes. These will capture offences involving advocating or threatening force or violence against protected groups, members of groups, their close associates and their property. Penalties will increase from five to seven years for base offences and from seven to 10 years where there's an added threat to the public order.

Thirdly, the bill will amend the Crimes Act 1914 to introduce a new general sentencing principle that will require the courts, when sentencing a person for a Commonwealth offence, to consider an offender's hate motivation based on race or national or ethnic origin as an aggravating factor. This will encourage judges to apply a higher penalty within the maximum penalty range where hate motivation is a factor in the commission of a crime.

Moreover, this bill will establish a new framework within the Criminal Code to enable the listing of organisations as prohibited hate groups. Once an organisation is listed, it will be a criminal offence to direct the activities of, be a member of, recruit for, give funds to or participate in training involving the organisation. Amongst other tests, and before a group is listed, the AFP minister must also obtain the Attorney-General's agreement in writing and arrange for a briefing for the Leader of the Opposition. On top of this, the bill will strengthen and expand the prohibited hate symbols offences in the Criminal Code, and symbols of these hate groups will be listed under the new regime.

Finally, the bill will amend the Migration Act to enable earlier, clearer and more defensible refusal and cancellation of visas where a noncitizen poses a risk to the Australian community through conduct that promotes hate, vilification or division, while ensuring consistency with constitutional constraints and existing character powers. The proposed changes to the Migration Act will strengthen the existing character powers to better protect the Australian community from noncitizens suspected of engaging in hate-motivated conduct or extremism.

I had the opportunity to listen to a number of members of the House speak on the Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Firearms and Customs Laws) Bill 2026 this morning. I think the reality is that we don't need a royal commission or an investigation. We can all watch the footage of what happened on that dreadful night of 14 December last year. The guns didn't fire themselves. The guns were in the hands of individuals who were holding hate and extremism in their hearts. The reality is that this particular bill shouldn't be addressed on its own. This legislation came as an omnibus bill, and it should be seen in its entirety. I ask those in the chamber to really look at the way the legislation is being presented to us today. The reality is that it was hatred and extremism that pulled the trigger.

Helen Haines (Indi, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak to the Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Criminal and Migration Laws) Bill 2026. The horrific attack on Jewish people celebrating in peace on 14 December ignited demands for strong and decisive action in response to this act of hate driven by violent extremism and carried out with firearms. There is much I wish to say about these reforms. While I welcome the government's decision to split the bills and allow each to be debated on its own merits, we have in fact been given very little time as a parliament to speak on them.

There are deep concerns being flagged by constitutional experts, civil society, faith leaders and the public, not only about the substance of these reforms but about the process. In his submission on the bill, the UN special rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism raises concerns that elements of the bill are inconsistent with Australia's international human rights obligations and, in relation to the rushed process, observes:

It is the experience of the Special Rapporteur's mandate worldwide that hasty law-making is prone to lead to over-reach, unintended consequences, and violations of human rights law, which does not well serve the victims of terrorist attacks or protect society.

There is widespread confusion and misinformation about what these reforms do and what they don't do. Rushing the legislative process only deepens that uncertainty. These reforms carry far-reaching consequences. As legislators, we must hold ourselves to the responsibility that poorly drafted or poorly examined laws may not actually make Australians safer.

I welcome the increased penalties for threatening force or violence, which appropriately reflect the seriousness of these crimes. I also welcome the new aggravated offences for hate preaching and grooming, which recognise that hate crimes are especially abhorrent when they're committed from positions of trust and influence. I agree with the intent of the new aggravated sentencing principle, but it should not be limited to a small subset of attributes, and I support the member for Wentworth's proposals to ensure that all forms of hatred are treated consistently.

Unfortunately, we have had limited opportunity to build consensus about the balance and proportionality of these laws. The hate speech provisions are technically complex, and a wide range of concerns have been raised about the way they are drafted and how they will operate, including the kinds of speech and conduct that may be captured. There are legitimate questions about things like procedural fairness, constitutional validity and the potential for unintended consequences. In addition to criminal amendments, the bill amends migration law to significantly expand the minister's powers to cancel or refuse visas, and we have not been presented with compelling evidence about why this is needed or how the current framework falls short. The statutory review of these reforms is essential to making sure they ultimately work as intended.

In many respects, I can live with the haste of this. I did not come here with the intention of standing in the way of immediate action on the serious issues this bill is intending to address. But the reality is that the report of the inquiry into this bill was only tabled this morning. The consequence of haste as a legislator is the missed opportunity to carefully consider and improve this significant legislation. That leaves me with considerable risk concerns. It truly does. I recognise that acts of antisemitism have left the Australian Jewish community living in terrible fear. I've spoken with Jewish leaders, and I understand the urgency of the parliament acting. I take my responsibilities as a legislator very seriously. I do have genuine concerns, but I have heard the call for urgent action.

Matt Gregg (Deakin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I commend the Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Criminal and Migration Laws) Bill 2026 to the House, knowing that we could and should have done more as an institution. We had the opportunity to stand up to hate speech and vilification, and we fell short. Sadly, the political reality of this parliament means that we couldn't get done everything we thought we needed to; however, this is an important step. It should be uncontroversial that hate groups should not be given the capacity to spread that vile hate across our community and to undermine social cohesion in some of the most heinous of ways. It should be uncontroversial that people in positions of power should be prevented from spreading that hate to vulnerable young people and using their positions to inflict the worst of pain on fellow members of our community. It should be uncontroversial that people who come into Australia as guests be expected to conduct themselves in a way that does not undermine social cohesion or act as a direct attack on our nation's values. We need to ensure that we are addressing opportunities and loopholes that exist in the current law and that have enabled organisations that have preached hate for a very long time to fall just under the criminal thresholds. It's time that we stand up as a parliament and address these obvious evils in our society.

These are sensible reforms. I appreciate that these have happened at a greater pace than some are used to, but there has been sufficient time to get across the detail. We do not have a lawyer shortage in this building. We do not have a shortage of people who can understand and comprehend legislation. For those who needed support, there are plenty of people around who can explain things. I get that it's complicated, but, now that we're facing two bills that are less complicated, there really is no reason for us not to pass these important reforms.

When we are talking about rights, yes, there is often a balancing act. Hate speech will almost inevitably, to some extent, impact on the freedom of speech. The balancing act is the subject of legitimate discussion, but it's not intellectually complex; it's a choice that has to be made, and leadership is about choices. What do you do to stand up to the challenge of antisemitism in our community at this moment in time? Do we sit by and allow it and pretend that the status quo is acceptable, or do we take meaningful and substantive action to address this social ill that has, since October 7, reared its ugly head in ways that we have not seen before in this country? It's appropriate for this parliament to stand up for the values of Australia, for the things that we hold dear, and this bill does just that.

We're hoping that this can be a moment of national unity. We have split the bill, when a lot of us on this side of the House think it should have remained as it was before, to get rid of the roadblocks that prevented real action being taken by this parliament. It is hoped and expected that this can be a moment of national unity, where people on both sides of the House can stand up for foundational principles, and where we can at least agree that groups dedicated to spreading hate are not acceptable in our community; that lines that were previously unsaid but understood by all have been crossed; and that lines need to be drawn in the sand to make sure that hate is denounced, that it is considered unacceptable and that the promotion of it is dealt with under law.

It's also important that these sentencing factors be changed. It is a more serious affront to the community and our society if a criminal offence is committed with racial hatred as its motivation. It is a legitimate sentencing factor. It goes to the seriousness of the offence, it goes to its repugnance and it goes to the importance of ensuring that the denunciation and punishment reflect the severity of what's been done.

These are sensible, pragmatic reforms. They reflect the values that we should really all share. They balance rights of freedom of association. There are existing defences under the Criminal Code that protect legitimate expressions of political discord, legitimate arguments, artistic expressions and all of those things. These bills can't be seen in isolation; they form part of a criminal code which contains defences around good faith. It is just a shame that we couldn't come together to deal with vilification. It's something that I hope that we can revisit another day. But hopefully these reforms, which go to the key concerns of many in the Jewish community about these hate groups openly and unashamedly spreading hate in ways we have not seen before, are something we can at least get behind. One would hope that, when Neo-Nazis are calling for this bill not to be passed, we take the clue. Perhaps it's best not to be on their side. Perhaps it's best that we stand up and address these hateful organisations without delay and stand up for our nation's values at this horrible time.

This is a sensible bill. I commend it to the House, and I hope it receives support from across the parliament.

Allegra Spender (Wentworth, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak in support of the Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Criminal and Migration Laws) Bill 2026. These are modest changes in this bill, but they are necessary. But let us be completely honest: neither this bill nor any of the actions of the parliament to date will eradicate antisemitism or keep the Jewish community safe in the future. There is much, much more work that needs to be done.

The fourteenth of December is one of the darkest days in modern Australian history, and it is a day that my community, Jewish and non-Jewish, will never, ever forget. Fifteen innocent people were violently murdered while celebrating their Jewish faith, customs and community. It was an attack on Jewish Australians and it was an attack on all of us as a country and all of our Australian values.

We know that violence does not start with weapons. It starts with words. It starts with hate. I acknowledge that in this bill there are some important steps to deal with the spread of hate, which leads to the spread of violence. I support the bill. I support the aggravated offences measures, particularly for hate preachers. I support the strengthened measures in relation to hate symbols. I support the actions in relation to hate preachers, and I support the fact that the home affairs minister now has the framework to proscribe certain groups—which should include, in my mind, groups like the National Socialist Network and Neo-Nazis and Hizb ut-Tahrir, who openly spread and promote virulent antisemitism as well as vile hatred against other groups in our country. These groups do not merely offend; they normalise dehumanisation and incitement. Their rhetoric corrodes our social fabric and creates a condition in which violence becomes possible.

But let's be honest: this bill does not get to the heart of what I believe we need to do as a country. There is extremism in Australia. There is Islamic extremism. There is Neo-Nazi extremism. These ideologies are a direct threat to Jewish Australians, and they are a threat to all of us. But this is not only a question of immediate security; it's also a profound challenge to our social cohesion. When parliament fails to address the direct causes of extremism and hatred, entire communities end up carrying the blame for the actions of a violent, extreme minority. This is what deeply concerns me about the current trajectory of our national conversation. Muslims and migrants are increasingly made to feel suspect by association. By failing to confront hateful individuals and ideologies directly, we drift towards a culture of guilt by association rather than accountability. We know that radicalisation thrives in environments where blameless people are persistently blamed, excluded or treated as inherently suspect. This is the consequence of a parliament that has failed to legislate clear standards of behaviour and failed to draw strong lines between what is offending, what is disagreeing and what is directly promoting and inciting hatred in our country.

I talk to the coalition here because the coalition has rightly spoken up on antisemitism very strongly for the last two years, and I commend it for that. But, when it comes to actions, it has not followed through, and the coalition could have and should have supported laws against vilification that the Jewish community called for before 14 December and is calling for even more strongly now. We do need to protect the Jewish community. I have had people come up to me constantly, saying: 'How is it possible, Allegra, that somebody can call for the final solution to the Jews without this being an offence in this country? How can people hatefully target the Jewish community in their words, when we know that words lead to action, without this being an offence in our country?'

We do have stronger laws, but they are a patchwork across our country, and this is the opportunity for the federal parliament to lead. But I do believe that the coalition has really stepped back from what the Jewish community has deliberately asked you for in this case, and that is a terrible shame. So when I hear the words—and I hear them constantly, and I think they are well meant—saying there is no place for extremism and that we need to stamp this out, my question is: what other mechanisms are you saying we can use now? You have rejected something that the Jewish community has been calling for for a long time. I put that forward in the previous parliament, and you also rejected it then.

The final thing I want to say is that we have a long road ahead of us. The security of the Jewish community is absolutely critical. The antisemitism envoy's packages and the actions taken there are absolutely critical. The royal commission is critical. But we also need to lead a better conversation in this country about how we disagree well, and I think that means drawing bright lines against hatred.

Julie-Ann Campbell (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On 14 December 2025 I was at home, having friends over for dinner. They were old schoolfriends. When we were around the table, we were breaking bread and talking about our families, our aspirations, our hopes and our dreams and sharing old memories. As were having that dinner, there were people in Bondi being murdered—people who will never again be able to sit around the dinner table talking about their hopes, their aspirations, their dreams and their memories. Those people are no longer with us because they were targeted as Australian Jews. This is an absolutely appalling and horrendous attack not just on the people who were involved that day but on every Australian.

In these last few days in this chamber, what we have remembered is who we are and what we stand for as Australians. Our fundamental principles and values as Australians are mateship, caring about one another and the fair go. None of these values are underpinned by the hate that led to those murders. We need to do something about that. It's our collective responsibility as a parliament to do something about that. We know that there is not one solution but there are many to tackle this and to ensure that it never happens again.

This bill, the Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Criminal and Migration Laws) Bill 2026, is about combating antisemitism. It's about combating hate. It's about making sure that we have legislation that backs in those Australian values that we hold so dear in this country. These reforms are about making sure that another piece of the puzzle is put in place so that this never happens again. It's a bill that will introduce new aggravated offences to ensure that very serious penalties apply to those in positions of influence and authority who commit hate crimes. It's a bill to ensure that we have increased penalties for the offences involving advocating or threatening force or violence against protected groups, members of groups, their close associates and their property.

It's a bill that will amend the Crimes Act to introduce a new general sentencing principle that will require a court, when sentencing a person, to consider an offender's hate motivation based on race or national or ethnic origin as an aggravating factor, because in this country it shouldn't matter what the colour of your skin is, what god you pray to or what your religion is; you should never be the victim of hate. We know what hate can lead to. It's about making sure that people in our community are held responsible and that hate is something that is outlawed, because we cannot afford to go down this road again. In particular, it's about making sure that our young people in this country are not infected by hate and that our most vulnerable people in this society can live and grow up free from hatred that leads to tragedy.

This bill is, at its core, about Australian values. It's about who we are as a nation. It's about who we want to continue to be as a nation. It's about taking the step to ensure that what happened in Bondi will never repeat itself there or anywhere else. For so many people's communities, children, families and loved ones, it is a tragedy that we wish will never happen again.

For me and everyone in this place, this is a serious issue. It's not one to be politicised; it's one for action and it's one for unity. This bill is about taking that step towards unity and healing after such an appalling antisemitic attack on Australian soil.

Kate Chaney (Curtin, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Like everyone else, I'm disappointed by the short timeframes provided to engage and consult on complex and important legislation. This bill, the Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Criminal and Migration Laws) Bill 2026, was introduced an hour ago. The committee inquiry was way too short, with the report only tabled today, and this bill will be passed tonight with debate curtailed. This makes a mockery of parliamentary scrutiny.

In the time available, I've looked at whether the bill would do four things: address the unacceptable normalisation of antisemitism, reduce the likelihood of hate motivated terrorist attacks, deal fairly with the rise of hatred and violence against all groups, and strike an appropriate balance with important freedoms.

Firstly, on the normalisation of antisemitism, this bill is a step forward. In the year to September 2024, antisemitic incidents increased by more than 300 per cent. This is not who we are, and it's important that the law shows that antisemitism is unacceptable in Australia. No matter what you think about the actions of a foreign government on the other side of the world, demonising someone for their race or culture in Australia is not okay. This bill tries to send this message by making racial hatred an aggravating factor in sentencing in a number of Commonwealth crimes, by increasing penalties for existing offences about promoting violence, by creating more serious offences for preachers and spiritual leaders and for people trying to radicalise children under 18, and by making it easier for the Minister for Home Affairs to cancel or refuse visas for people intent on spreading racial hatred. Bigger penalties will not stamp out antisemitism. In fact, no change to the law can, although the vilification laws that have been removed from this bill would have been a good addition and went no further than the current WA law does. But, even without them, this bill does send the message.

Secondly, will the bill reduce the likelihood of hate motivated terrorist attacks? Possibly to a small extent. We will never be completely safe from terrorism, but we can address the means and the motivation. The gun reform laws passed this morning are an improvement, limiting the means. Dealing with antisemitism is also an improvement to address motivation. The bill also aims to deal with the groups that organise and facilitate hate and violence by allowing the minister to list organisations as hate groups if they prepare, plan or advocate for hate crimes related to race or national or ethnic origin. It will be a criminal offence to be associated with such a group. But these are limited steps forward, and they come at a cost. Criminalising organisations is a big step.

Thirdly is protection for other groups. This bill does little to ensure that we make Australia safe for other at-risk groups. Many of the new provisions relate to race, national or ethnic origin, which won't address Islamophobia or threats to the LGBTQIA community. This is why I strongly support the amendment that will be put forward by the member for Wentworth to expand protections to other protected groups defined by sex, sexual orientation, gender identity and sex characteristics, disability and religion. If we're going to deal with the fraying of social cohesion, we should be protecting all groups from those who seek to spread hatred. It makes no sense to have different levels of protection for different groups.

Fourthly, does it strike an appropriate balance against important freedoms? The speed with which we've had to review these laws and the lack of time for serious public consultation means there is some risk here of unintended consequences. For example, I can see that there could be circumstances in which the minister wants to act quickly, but criminalising organisations with the right to be heard specifically exempted and no merits review is a significant power that could be misused in the future. With the democratic backsliding we're seeing in the US at the moment, it's not too hard to imagine. That's why I'll be proposing an amendment to ensure that a decision made to list a group as a hate group is subject to a merits review.

In conclusion, the process of passing this bill is very poor. But, despite it not extending protections to other groups and lacking some important safeguards, I will be supporting it because it sends a message to arrest the normalisation of antisemitism, and it may reduce the likelihood of future terrorist attacks by criminalising the structures that could support these attacks. Building social cohesion will require more than a change of law, but this is a start. Importantly, I'm glad to hear that an amendment will be agreed to in the Senate for a two-year review of this rushed legislation. I will drop my proposed amendment to this effect, to ensure this review, because it will happen in the Senate. It's essential that we review the impact and adequacy of this bill after the conclusion of the royal commission. Thank you.

Leon Rebello (McPherson, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Like 9/11, we all remember where we were on 14 December last year. For me, I was at a Gold Coast Hanukkah celebration at the exact same time that the Bondi attack went down. It was a really good opportunity to have the Jewish community on the Gold Coast come together for what was supposed to be a very joyful, positive, light filled celebration. Halfway through the ceremony, I was tapped on the shoulder and informed about the tragedy that was unfolding in Sydney. I looked around at the families, at the kids, the parents, the grandparents and the beautiful Jewish community that we have on the Gold Coast. It hit me that what unfolded in Sydney could well and truly have been something that unfolded in that crowd.

I've been speaking about the rise of antisemitism in this country since I entered the parliament mid-last year. It's something that has to be stamped out, and it's something that as a country we should have taken a tougher stand against. It's something that the Jewish community has long been calling for us to do. What happened in Bondi—let's be clear—was the result of two things: antisemitism and radical Islam. These were the root causes. Hatred and extremism have no place in Australia, and, from day one, we as the coalition said that we would work constructively with the government to address this. Instead what we saw was that the government delayed parliament, resisted calls for a royal commission and produced what was unfit legislation that not only failed to address those root causes that I've spoken about but also severely threatened free speech. Over the last couple of weeks, I've spoken to many people in my electorate—and I've received countless pieces of correspondence from them—who expressed those concerns. They're very real concerns that we in the coalition listen to.

The former bill, as I said, was so unfit for purpose that even the government conceded failure. They scrapped their racial vilification laws and have left the coalition to clean up the wreckage.

This new bill which is before us now creates new and tougher penalties for crimes motivated by antisemitism and radical Islamic extremism, and it supports tougher action on radical Islamic extremists in positions of influence, specifically targeting those who radicalise or recruit people towards violent or extremist conduct. It also establishes a prohibited extremist group listing regime. Radical Islamic extremist groups like Hizb ut-Tahrir have long operated as conveyor belts to extremism, and internationally they're banned or restricted. In Australia they've operated without consequence and have fuelled antisemitism.

This new bill expands the Migration Act to allow visa refusal or cancellation for spreading hatred and extremism, including for involvement in hate-crime conduct, hateful public statements or links to terrorist prohibited hate groups, and this includes those who glorify violence, fuel antisemitism and radicalise individuals. It's in our national interest that the laws relating to cancellation and refusal of visas be strengthened to ensure that the Australian government of the day has the powers to protect the Australian people.

The amendments proposed are reasonable and proportionate by the coalition, and they will enhance the ability of the government to cancel the visas of those who engage in antisemitic rhetoric, Islamic extremism—which is the extremism underpinning Islamic State and other terrorist organisations—and other extremist ideologies which pose a risk of harm to the Australian people. This is not about politics; it's about community safety, confidence in the rule of law, standing with Jewish Australians and confronting Islamic extremism honestly and directly. Australians expect their parliament to name the problem and tackle it properly, and I'm confident that we can do that today.

Ali France (Dickson, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Criminal and Migration Laws) Bill 2026. Some of us here in this place know loss, know trauma and know grief—the grief of losing a child or a family member. We know that gut-wrenching feeling, that visceral feeling, of coming home and they are no longer there. But what I don't know, and can't begin to know, is racially-motivated terror, and the loss, trauma, grief and fear that derives from that.

I know what it is like to see danger and to put your body in front of your child to give them every chance of living. I know it because I did that, as an out-of-control car came towards my four-year-old in a pram in 2011. That day has never left me. It is seared into every breath I take. It is fear that I never knew before the accident, and it means the management of never-ending anxiety that, at any moment, anywhere, life can end.

What I don't know, and have never lived with, is racially-motivated terror, anxiety and fear—deep fear—that you might be purposefully targeted by another human because of your faith, the colour of your skin, where you were born or where your parents or their parents were born; that, while you're doing your grocery shopping, another human will whisper under their breath; that, while you're dropping your child at school, another parent will say things about the way you might be dressed or what's happening in your country of birth; that your family members, your children, may be abused, shunned and targeted; that, while attending a celebration at our iconic Bondi Beach with your friends and family, other humans would plan a mass-murder event targeting you, your friends and family on that beach. I don't know that, and nor should any Australian. That is not living.

What I do know is the horrific loss of a child. I know some of the grief that Charlotte's parents are going through. It is a particularly cruel existence, living while your child no longer walks with you. What I don't know is the intentional murder of a child—that another human chose that, planned that and was motivated by hate to do that. Cancer chose my boy. Leukaemia took him. No human took him. I can't imagine the grief, the anger and resentment that that would trigger.

Antisemitism, hate and extremism have no place in Australia, and I certainly support any changes that will help ensure that no parent or family experiences the trauma of Bondi again. This bill is about confronting extremism, protecting social cohesion and safeguarding our communities. It is about protecting the loss of life, preventing violence and hate. This bill, together with related firearms and customs law reforms, delivers strong, targeted action against those who spread hate and violence. The bill strengthens hate crime laws by introducing aggravated offences for those in positions of influence, including religious leaders who advocate violence and adults who radicalise children. These provisions reflect the serious harm caused when an authority is being abused. Penalties for hate crimes will be increased to ensure they reflect the gravity of these offences.

These laws send a clear message that crimes driven by antisemitism and racial hatred will attract strong consequences. This bill is about protecting innocent lives. It is about honouring 15 beautiful people who left us too soon. Bondi must never occur again.

Tim Wilson (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Small Business) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Criminal and Migration Laws) Bill 2026. Since 7 October 2023, Australia's antisemitism crisis slowly evolved from words to protests, intimidation, harassment, fire bombings and, ultimately, catastrophe on 14 December 2025. Throughout this whole period, Australia did not have a problem with laws; it had a problem with enforcement. That was missing. Certainly, there's always room for refinement, but what was missing more than anything else was leadership. This government is seeking to use the law to fix the problems of absent leadership. After this tragedy, Australians wanted our leaders to unite our country and elevate the nation, but it was not to be. Instead, we had floated an omnibus bill that brought together new speech laws, firearms regulation, migration amendments and the creation of new prohibited hate groups, and we were told take it or leave it and decide in record time. This is not how a mature democracy nor a mature government behaves.

In response to the Bondi terrorist attacks, Jewish Australians have said the answer is to be more Jewish. And in response to a terrorist attack attacking our way of life and a government that is dismissive of our democratic processes, our parliament has rightly reasserted itself and our democratic processes and lived up to the best of our democratic institutions. The bills have now been split. The response from Goldstein constituents, Jewish and non-Jewish, to the government's so-called hate speech provisions was visceral. No-one would be surprised that I raised my own concerns about how these sections were drafted. The government has now withdrawn them.

The Jewish community has expressed their anger that the firearm provisions were a deliberate distraction from the broader issue. I'm happy to support the migration amendments, but the minister already has wide-ranging powers. The minister has been using them, of course, and we know he's been using them against Israeli visas. My hope is that he will use them against those who preach Islamic hatred and extremism instead.

Finally, my liberal instincts teach me to be wary of some of the new prohibited hate group powers, and I am wary of them. After reading the bill and having looked at the referral, oversight, transparency and renewal obligations, I think it's fair to say that I'm alert but not alarmed. The need for vigilance to oversee these new powers will be very important in protecting the community and also our liberal democratic norms.

I note some members in this debate have already talked about how these laws have been rushed through the parliament and normal processes have not been followed. I agree with some of those concerns, but I find it odd that they're seeking to move amendments to expand those powers without any proper process to be able to understand the consequences, and I caution them against doing so. We know the evil we are seeking to target, which is those people who preach hatred, particularly extremism and the radicalisation pathways that promote violence against Australia's community of Jewish heritage. We should understand that's the specific nature of the cause we're focused on now.

Anyone who thinks today's bills will cage the antisemitism threat that has been unleashed misunderstands the challenge and the necessary effort to contain it, just as the government misunderstood the consequences of leaving it unchecked. Their inaction will be judged as lacking moral clarity and courage when they were warned. They knew what was right, and they refused to act. Now is the time for good people to stand up. It will not be demonstrated in our words but, of course, in our deeds.

When we tolerate extremism against Australians of Jewish heritage, it does not end there. We have already seen an uptick in homophobic violence because we know that the equal and opposite reaction to one form of extremism is other varieties of the same. Social cohesion is essential to the type of Australia we want, not just for Australians of Jewish heritage but for every Australian. It will decide whether we honour our inheritance, and hand a nation that makes us proud to the next generation, or whether we knowingly blink in the face of those who sow discord.

Goldstein's constituents have lived with the cost of inaction, as many others have. They see the scale of the problem with clarity and can see that, too often, our nation's leaders have blinked. They are now looking to this parliament to lead and to give them hope that once again we can rebuild the safe and free nation that we want Australia to be, that it should be and that they desperately need it to be.

Jason Wood (La Trobe, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for International Development and Pacific Island Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Islamic terrorism is nothing new. On September 11, 2001, we saw the awful events in America. Another incident was the bombing in Oklahoma by Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols, who were two hardline white supremacists. These laws here today must target both Nazi sympathisers and Islamic extremists.

Here in Australia in 2008, Abdul Benbrika was convicted of directing planned terrorist attacks on the MCG and the Crown casino in Melbourne. He had been removed from his mosque because of his radical beliefs, but he went out there to use his influence to target young people. That's something important about the need to target hate speech.

Back in, I think, 2008, I was out there saying that we need to target hate preachers. The reason for that is my background with Victoria Police. When I look at laws and legislation, I'm looking at how police can find a conviction. I've had concerns in the past. For example, going back to September 11, you had radical preachers out there talking about how the September 11 attacks were justified and saying that it's a good thing when infidels die. It's not actually going far enough to be incitement or threats. That's why this legislation here today is very important: to make sure we capture people who are trying to influence younger people to commit hideous attacks.

We look at what's happened in recent times. It's even been reported in the news overnight that, again, our Jewish Australian community has been targeted. Young Jewish teens had to escape from a ute trying to hit them in St Kilda East as the offenders drove away doing Nazi salutes. Antisemitism has got much worse since 7 October, when those awful attacks happened in Israel. Two days after, we had statements and awful chants made in the Sydney Opera House by pro-Palestinian demonstrators. Then it went further, with weekly protests at universities, with chants targeting the Jewish community—and no action was taken. You then had Neo-Nazis with their chants and their salutes, trying to get more members to join them. All of this just breeds more hate. Anything goes. We've seen the hate escalate against the Jewish community, going from chants to the bombing of a synagogue in Melbourne in a terrorist attack. We heard from authorities of that plan from overseas, which is quite unbelievable. And then we had the awful atrocity at Bondi. My thoughts go out to the victims.

I'm very much in support of targeting hate preachers and hate groups. We've got all the advisers here today. One thing, though—and I'm putting my detective hat on here—when it comes to social media, I notice the proposed hate speech laws are going to target comments made on public social media platforms. What about private WhatsApp groups—for example, I'm on one with 200 members—that you are invited to join? When it comes to this Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Criminal and Migration Laws) Bill 2026—and I've heard this before—the government is really rushing this through.

We've recalled parliament early, but for members to work out if this legislation goes far enough—for example, when it comes to targeting those using social media—it really needed a lot more time and effort. Our Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security was only given a very short time to make its report. Even with the legislation, we only got to see it this morning.

Again, my thoughts are with the victims of the Bondi massacre.

Melissa McIntosh (Lindsay, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Women) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Australia is one of the most successful multicultural nations in the world, and that success rests on a simple foundation: a strong, fair and orderly immigration system. Australians are generous people. We welcome migrants. We value their contribution and we are rightly proud of our multicultural society. But Australians also expect their government to manage migration responsibly, to uphold the law and to put community safety first. That is the standard against which the migration section of the Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Criminal and Migration Laws) Bill 2026 must be judged. Immigration is not just an abstract policy debate. It affects real people—families trying to find housing, workers competing for jobs, communities relying on already stretched services and migrants who have followed the rules and played by the book.

Views on immigration are strong in outer metro electorates such as mine, where infrastructure is under pressure. Western Sydney has a wonderful multicultural community and concerns around immigration levels are not about race but about services and quality of life. In late 2025, results from a local survey showed that many of my constituents believe immigration is too high and impacts roads, hospitals, schools and housing. Eighty-two per cent said that immigration is important to them. Ninety-one per cent said it was placing significant pressure on our services and infrastructure, such as our roads, our schools and our hospitals. Ninety per cent want us to decrease the level of immigration.

It's not just about the pressures. Migration concerns are also about the safety of our citizens. Today, I received hundreds of emails from concerned people in my electorate, as well as hundreds more from across Australia, who are deeply concerned about this bill. I say this to them: I have heard you; I have read your emails and your opinions matter. Shane from Orchard Hill shares that immigration is having a negative impact on the community. Housing, infrastructure and schools are his biggest concerns. Louise from Claremont Meadows says: 'Successful societies are based on social cohesion. Immigration in Australia is a failed experiment that has led to high crime rates, lower standards of living and lower social cohesion.'

Our communities deserve a migration system built on integrity at its core. That means clear rules, consistent enforcement and decisions that are made in Australia's national interest. Measures that strengthen the government's ability to deal with serious criminal conduct, protect the community and enforce visa conditions are necessary. Australians should not be asked to accept a system that allows dangerous individuals to enter and remain in our country because of weak laws or administrative failure. Integrity cuts both ways. Strong powers must come with strong safeguards. Ministerial discretion must be exercised transparently and responsibly. Decisions that affect people's lives must be lawful, proportionate and subject to proper scrutiny. The rule of law is not optional, and it must apply to government just as much as it applies to everyone else. This parliament has a duty to get it right.

With very little time, the coalition has been focused, working hard to ensure that this legislation targets genuine threats. We are working through what's left of the bill to make sure that it works and that it deals with hate and extremist groups. This means enabling the immigration minister to deal with Islamic extremists, who we want to stop coming into this country. These groups are a genuine threat to our safety and to our way of life.

The revised legislation no longer includes the provisions that sparked free-speech concerns across the parliament—although, even with the changes, we must ensure that it does not impinge on freedom of expression or freedom of association. Instead, it must focus on the tougher penalties for existing hate crimes, expanded powers to list hate organisations, and stronger visa cancellation and refusal powers in relation to noncitizens engaged in extremist activity and online extremist views and ideology.

The migration amendments in this bill sharpen the focus of existing character powers so that they clearly capture extremist advocacy and antisemitic behaviour, including where that conduct occurs online offshore. Antisemitism today is often transnational in nature, spread through digital platforms, imported through overseas networks and amplified by individuals who have no permanent stake in Australia. The coalition supports clearer grounds for refusing or cancelling visas where a noncitizen has demonstrated that they promote racial or ethnic hatred. We have pushed for additional safeguards to address the risks, and we have worked to ensure that there are additional protections contained in the legislation.

We need to remember why we're here: to tackle extremist groups, to better protect Jewish Australians—and all Australians—and to ensure that terrorism does not continue. We must ensure that the integrity of this bill is strong and that Australians can have confidence in it.

Barnaby Joyce (New England, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to say that we have been absolutely jammed in consideration of this. The first bill, which was part of the omnibus bill, arrived at 7.09 in the morning and was guillotined at 10.00. This bill arrived sometime later. It's substantially different to what was in the omnibus bill, and now we're about to be guillotined again. I might just take you to one section of it that really concerns me. It concerns me that a hate crime, as of now, would constitute an offence against provisions of a law of a state or territory. What we are now relying on—and this is very concerning—is that you will come under the remit of the Commonwealth for a hate crime in aggravated circumstances, punishable by up to 15 years in jail, premised on what a state or territory might deem to be a hate crime.

We're starting to get an awfully wide net on what was supposed to be succinctly dealing with the issue of antisemitism. If we had had a clarion focus on antisemitism—that is, the hatred and attacking of the Jewish people, which has been done in this instance by fundamental Islamic terrorism—then this would be so much cleaner, but you have broadened this in such a form that stapled to a very noble cause is a whole range of peripheral issues. That really causes great concern. When people vote against this—and they will—it has to be understood that it is because of the mischievous nature of attaching other circumstances to the bill that it has to be voted down in bulk.

This bill has not been to a committee. There's an omnibus bill that has, but this section of that omnibus bill is substantially different. It has not been to a committee. It has not had the proper transparency. A bill that has not been to a committee is nonetheless going to be guillotined. Why are you voting for something that, might I suggest, you haven't even read? What other things that you haven't even read are you now going to just vote for? You definitely haven't read the 89 pages of this. I have to admit there are not a lot of differences in this, but there certainly are in the other one. If you want to have the jurisdiction of the federal Crimes Act being administered by a territory and then the legal act of a territory determining the penalty you will have under the Commonwealth act, then this— (Time expired)

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In accordance with the resolution unanimously agreed by the House yesterday, the second reading debate shall conclude at 1 pm, with questions being put on any amendments moved to the motion for the second reading and on the second reading of the bill. I put the question before the House now that the House deal with the second reading of this bill.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.