HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1)
2022-06-01 Daily Xml
Contents
Xml

Motions

Antisemitism

The Hon. S.L. GAME (16:03): I move:

That this council—

1. Endorses and adopts the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism together with its contemporary examples, which is: 'Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.'

2. Notes that this definition is to be understood in the contemporary examples given by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, such as:

(a) calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion;

(b) making mendacious, dehumanising, demonising, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective—such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions;

(c) accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews;

(d) denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (for example, gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust);

(e) accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust;

(f) accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations;

(g) denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, for example, by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour;

(h) applying double standards by requiring of it a behaviour not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation;

(i) using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (for example, claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterise Israel or Israelis;

(j) drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis; and

(k) holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the State of Israel.

I am pleased to move the adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism, and I would like to acknowledge Reverend the Hon. Frederick John Nile MLC in the New South Wales parliament for moving the motion there earlier this year.

South Australians are affiliated with more than 100 religions, including Christian, Buddhism, Islam, Hinduism, Sikhism, Bahai, Aboriginal Australian traditional religions and Judaism. I hold the view that all communities of faith should be able to follow their beliefs free of discrimination but subject to the laws of Australia. It is in this context that I speak to the motion today, seeking the support of the Legislative Council to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism.

The IHRA definition of antisemitism is not a legal instrument, but it is designed to assist governments and administrators with what it means to be antisemitic. The IHRA definition has two parts. The first part is the definition stating:

Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.

The second part provides:

Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to:

Calling for, aiding or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.

Making mendacious, dehumanising, demonising, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective—such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.

Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.

Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).

Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.

Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.

Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour.

Applying double standards by requiring of it a behaviour not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.

Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterise Israel or Israelis.

Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.

Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.

It is axiomatic that you cannot deal effectively with a problem without defining it. It needs to be pointed out that the IHRA definition does not prevent criticism of Israel. Indeed, it has a specific provision that 'criticism of Israel similar to that levelled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic'. However, if you vilify Israel alone in a manner different and demanding a standard different from other countries, you cross a line.

All mainstream Jewish organisations in Australia emphasise the importance of the IHRA definition of antisemitism as a useful tool for education and guidance. The Australian Jewish Association has been advocating for its adoption since 2019. Eight hundred organisations have adopted the IHRA definition of antisemitism, including 19 US states, 204 local government bodies in the United Kingdom and 314 educational institutions.

Australia became a full member of IHRA in 2019, but it was only in late 2021 that the federal government adopted the IHRA definition. Former Prime Minister Scott Morrison made the announcement, and the current Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, then opposition leader, also stated his support. Since the federal announcement, both the New South Wales and Victorian state governments, again both with bipartisan support, have also adopted the IHRA definition of antisemitism in full.

Antisemitism is associated with one of the darkest chapters of human history. When humanity abandons civilised moral codes, societies and ideologies which embrace it typically suffer a major decline, if not complete destruction. Antisemitism is a political doctrine that led to the mass extinction of the bulk of European Jewry between 1933 and 1945.

Reports from the United Kingdom, numerous European countries, the United States, Canada, South America and Australia point to a dangerous resurgence of antisemitism: 490 antisemitic incidents were recorded by the Community Security Group in Australia in 2021, a 38 per cent increase on the year before. The CSG states that it is highly likely that there remains significant under-reporting and that the true number is much higher. The single highest category of antisemitic incidents reported was abusive behaviour at 424 incidents, and three incidents involved schoolchildren.

What is going on? That it is happening within living memory of the Holocaust should shock all people of goodwill. At a minimum in Australia, all federal and state bodies, including schools and universities and media, should formally adopt the working definition of IHRA.

In recent years the ABC reported on a wave of pro-Nazi and antisemitic posters and stickers appearing around Adelaide, including on university campuses and at Adelaide Synagogue. Some of the material featured images of swastikas, Nazi leader Adolf Hitler and offensive depictions of Jewish people. University of South Australia Student Association president said at the time:

Certainly we have seen on all four university metropolitan campuses stickers and posters with Nazi imagery and racist slogans.

I have been contacted directly by students at the University of Adelaide thanking me for bringing forward this motion and expressing to me that they feel too afraid to identify as Jewish on campus. I am asking that South Australia join with the bipartisan approach shown federally and also adopted in New South Wales and Victoria. While this does not solve antisemitism, it would be a powerful signal that Australia stands united against antisemitism.

In closing, I would like to thank Dr David Adler, President of the Australian Jewish Association, for drawing my attention to this important motion. It has been a great privilege to introduce the motion to the Legislative Council of the South Australian parliament, and I would like to reiterate that I believe in people's right to maintain their culture and belief practices in Australia in a way that fosters a unified Australia, good relationships and respect between everybody.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. T.T. Ngo.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT