Phillip Thompson
Herbert · Liberal National Party · Australia
“The schedule ensures that a former partner is not excluded from support services simply because their relationship with the serving member has ended. Facilitating access to assistance for safe separation and improving the safety of victims-survivors are objectives the coalition strongly supports.”
“The general public around the country expects members of our ADF to be at the highest standard, and so do I, because when the time comes—and history shows it will—we will ask our brave men and women to travel to a foreign land, to stand side-by-side with our allies with the Australian flag on their shoulder and their will to win.”
“There is a word that used to mean something in this country—trust. Trust was the commitment a government made to the Australian people. This Labor prime minister said from this dispatch box whilst in opposition: … you can only lie to people once. Well, it's clear that this prime minister doesn't take his own advice.”
“Effective oversight will be the key to ensuring that lessons of the royal commission are translated into lasting and systematic improvements. The coalition supports the objectives of this bill. We are mindful of the history of reform in this area. For too many, the system has been the source of frustration rather than support.”
“We approach this debate in a spirit of constructive engagement, acknowledging the valuable work of ex-service organisations, advocates and families who have fought for these changes. However, our support is cautious.”
“These are the metrics by which the parliament and further governments will be judged. The coalition supports the referral of this legislation to a committee inquiry in the Senate. This process is not about delay; it's about diligence.”
The complete record
Every one of 308 lines we hold for Phillip Thompson, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 7.
“I believe that it's in the best interest of the parliament to accept this amendment, and it's in the best interests of our veterans. Many veterans will be tuning in, listening to and watching what this parliament is about to do. People have been waiting a long time for the national commission to be up and running. It's the policy that we brought forward back in 2020 under the then Minister for Veterans Affairs, Darren Chester, who's in this place today. I believe that we want to work collaboratively with the government to make sure that we can get this implemented as quickly as possible but also to make sure that the public—the community, veterans and their families—can see what's happening and whether it's working and can hold the government accountable, as they should. No veteran should die by suicide.”
“It marks two years since the royal commission's final report and one year since the commissioner commenced operation. That is more than sufficient time to assess whether early-stage reforms are being delivered and whether government commitments are translating into action. Earlier reporting ensures veterans, families and the parliament can see measurable progress, not just promises. If the government is confident in its reform program, it should welcome earlier independent assessment. This amendment strengthens transparency and reinforces accountability. It does not change the commissioner's independence or powers. The coalition's objective is simple: reforms recommended by the royal commission must be implemented quickly and assessed openly.”
“I move: (1) Clause 18, page 20 (line 11), omit "2 December 2027", substitute "30 September 2026". The coalition is moving an amendment to bring forward the timing of the first implementation review by the commissioner. As currently drafted, the first assessment of the government's implementation of the royal commission recommendations is not required to be completed until December 2027. That means the report may not be tabled until 2028, almost four years after the royal commission reported. That is too slow and risks weakening accountability. Veterans and families were promised urgent reform, not delayed reporting. Independent oversight only works if it's timely and visible. Our amendment would require the first implementation assessment to be completed by no later than 30 September 2026. That timing is reasonable and practical.”
“I remember having a long chat with him about what's right. It's very easy to get caught up in the political turmoils and what your political party, the government or the opposition are doing, but it's right to stand up and say: 'Do you know what? This is long overdue. It needs to happen.' We need to be sitting with the families without saying, 'This is what you get.' We're asking them what they need, because we failed them.”
“I think it's important that, whilst we debate this and highlight different areas, we do it with one thing in the front of our mind: we only sit in this place because of the brave, heroic actions of our Defence Force personnel, our veterans and their families. We owe it to them to make sure that we're doing everything we can to look after them and make sure we're doing everything we can to get them the help they need if they need it. Not all veterans are broken; some of us are. We're veterans, not victims. We want a hand up, not a handout. But the parliament's job is to make sure that veterans can get the support that they need. I want to again thank the member for Gippsland. It wasn't an easy time when we were talking about the national commissioner, the royal commission, a global pandemic and everything that was happening.”
“We argued, debated and didn't act in the best interests of these families. We were divided; it was politicised. I don't think any political party was immune to it being politicised. It was horrible. It didn't bring their loved ones back. It didn't make their hearts get filled with love again. But we have an opportunity now to make sure that we're putting in legislation that is right. I don't want to bury any more of my friends. I don't want families to bury any more of their sons and daughters. I don't want wives and husbands burying their loved ones, children growing up without a parent, or mums and dads growing older without their children. That's not what I want to see.”
“I'd like that person to not have to review what the coroner has written, speak to people in Defence or speak to families who are heartbroken because their loved one has succumbed to their war within. We shouldn't have lost more people by suicide on Australian soil than we ever did in combat. It is not good enough, and it's a failure of consecutive governments—I don't care what colour shirt you wear. I stood in the back corner during the pandemic, when we had to have a lectern; we weren't allowed to sit in our seats. I looked up to the gallery and saw mothers of those sons who have died by suicide holding their photos. I remember looking up and saying, 'I'm sorry.' I think every suicide that has happened since I've been elected means I've failed. We have failed. The families have this part of their heart ripped out.”
“It is fair to say that if the coalition's national commissioner model had been supported instead of opposed, independent oversight would already be mature and operating. The coalition will support this framework now because veterans and their families cannot afford further delay, but the history should be acknowledged. Labor put politics ahead of veteran wellbeing five years ago and is finally delivering on the commission. Later today, I'll be moving an amendment to this bill. I will speak to that later. It is important to note that the national commissioner is not here to pull out every individual case. It is to look at the systemic problems and the failures, shine a light on them and make sure we learn from them. I'd really like the national commissioner to not have a job.”
“The bill that we proposed was for an independent statutory oversight body with basically the same structural features that are now being implemented some six years later. Labor opposed that legislation at the time, and it was for political purposes. Their stated position then was that a royal commission was necessary first, but they then rejected an immediate independent oversight mechanism that could have begun driving reform and accountability years earlier. As a result, the establishment of an independent statutory oversight body was delayed. The delay matters because early independent oversight working alongside the royal commission could have accelerated system reform and earlier accountability across DVA and Defence. The structure Labor is now implementing closely mirrors what the coalition proposed after having voted against it.”
“It is also important to put on the record that this is not a new idea from this government. The coalition introduced legislation to establish an independent national commissioner for defence and veteran suicide prevention back in 2020. My friend the member for Gippsland stood next to me and the then prime minister in the courtyard after meeting with families and ex-service organisations and announced this as a policy, as a bill, as something that we wanted to bring forward to make sure that we weren't going to be burying any more of our bravest, by having a strong, independent national commissioner who would investigate and shine a light into where the problems had been and to learn from it so we could make sure that our people were not dying by suicide.”
“During the Senate inquiry, stakeholders were clear that the commission must be genuinely independent from Defence and DVA, have clear authority and operate transparently, and this bill is stronger because of the contributions of those individuals and ex-service organisations. The inquiry and information-gathering powers are appropriately strong because weak oversight powers produce weak oversight outcomes. Those powers are balanced with safeguards, warrants, procedural fairness and the rights of response, which ensures both effectiveness and fairness. Public reporting and mandatory tabling in parliament are critical. Oversight only works when findings are visible and cannot be buried inside agencies. Mandatory government responses within set timeframes matter. Recommendations must trigger action, not silence.”
“We made it clear at the time that the commission should be established through standalone legislation, entirely separate from defence and DVA, with stronger independence and guarantees. We moved an amendment to ensure that a dedicated Senate inquiry could provide proper scrutiny of the commission model. That inquiry confirmed widespread stakeholder concern about independence, structure, powers, family inclusion and clarity on remit. Many of the improvements, including the true independence of this standalone bill, exist because of the scrutiny that was forced, not because they were built into the government's original design.”
“The government's original attempt to create the commission through a late amendment to unrelated legislation was rushed, poorly handled and lacked proper consultation with the parliament and the veteran community. A major structural reform body should never be created through a last-minute legislative insertion that undermines confidence and scrutiny and the importance of it. Parliament was asked to wave through a complex oversight body with limited visibility and limited stakeholder engagement. That is not how serious veteran policy should be made. The coalition supported the amended vets bill only to avoid delaying long-overdue compensation and rehabilitation reforms for veterans, not because we supported the government's process or structure.”
“One of its most significant recommendations was the creation of a permanent, independent statutory oversight body to drive reform and measure progress. These bills, the Defence and Veterans' Service Commissioner Bill 2025 and the Defence and Veterans' Service Commissioner (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2025, are intended to give effect to that recommendation, and the coalition supports that objective. Independent oversight with real powers, public reporting and parliamentary accountability are essential if reform is going to be genuine, measurable and sustained. Oversight bodies without teeth do not drive change; they produce reports that gather dust. Establishing the commission through standalone legislation is the right model, and it is the model the coalition argued for from the beginning.”
“Our veterans, our Defence Force members, deserve the respect, the dignity and the support that they need. Establishing a national commissioner is a step in the right direction. The coalition called for and established the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide because veterans and their families deserve truth, accountability and reform. We took that step recognising that too many families had been ignored for too long and that confidence in the system was broken. The royal commission confirmed what families and the ex-service community had been saying: there were systematic failures, and it required systematic oversight and structural reform. It made clear that lasting reform requires independent, system-wide oversight across the Defence and veteran ecosystem, not oversight embedded within departments.”
“To all those that continue to wear the uniform, our veterans and your families: the freedoms that we enjoy today are on the back of hard-fought battles, wars and sacrifice that you have made. Through natural disasters, peacekeeping and combat operations, our Defence Force members have served with honour and distinction. When they transition out, they expect to get looked after and to make sure that their government has the policies and the framework to make sure that they get the support that they need. But, tragically, we have seen far too many of our brave men and women succumb to their war within—served their nation proud but died by suicide. That is a national shame. It is something that we in parliament should never accept as being normal or a reality.”
“Many ADF veterans have succumbed to their war within, and hundreds of thousands of Australian Afghan veterans have the memories of what that hell on earth actually is. As part of the Taliban government, they have a person by the name of Anas Haqqani, who ran the Haqqani network and who was sentenced to death. He's responsible for terrorist attacks around the world, killing women, children and soldiers. That's who is counting the money now. The Taliban hate us, and they should hate us for free.”
“This government's priorities are all wrong. Your mortgage is going up. People are doing it tough. Sitting around the dinner table, they're talking about what they're going to have to cut back on—groceries, school supplies, insurance, their mortgage. When asked about this, the Prime Minister and the Treasurer both laughed it off. They're not spending your hard earned tax dollars where they should. For an example, instead of putting your hard earned money back into supporting Australians, they're sending hundreds of millions of dollars to Afghanistan, to the Taliban. The Taliban are responsible for 41 deaths of Australian soldiers and more than 200 wounded in combat, including myself.”
“I know this has already been raised with him. I do note the other member in the House and her service as well. This isn't from a place of anger or fight. This is just from a place of thinking, and we need to find our place where we can land to make sure that we're not fighting and we're here to serve the people that send us here and our Australian Defence Force personnel.”
“In closing, I just want to say that we serve here on the back of our brave men and women who've served this nation. We have the privilege and the freedoms to be able to pass laws and legislation and live freely in this country because of our brave men and women. I want to make sure we're keeping warfighters warfighting. I want to make sure we're keeping our service personnel fit and happy to be able to continue to do their job. I don't want this to hang over their heads so people question whether they should get help or not. It's one fear that I do have. I think if this were taken out to the public, to those currently serving—not to the veteran community, because it's not for them; it's for our still-serving Defence Force personnel—then we would get similar feedback. We do plan on working with the government and with the minister.”
“There will be supports and help for those people that have these addictions and problems. But, if you've had a marriage breakdown or if you've returned from a deployment and you're going through a bit of a tough time, but you can still operate and do your job and there isn't a mandatory reportable, I don't think the CDF needs to open his email—or her email—and see that Private Such-and-such has gone through the VRB for a mental health concern or gone through the non-liability healthcare system. If that gets reported back to the chief, I just think it's an overreach. I think it's more red tape, and I want to make sure that our brave men and women feel comfortable and confident to be able to continue to serve and do their job with whatever it may be. The coalition has our position on this, and the shadow minister read it out last night.”
“I spent some time last night working and talking through it with Angus Taylor, who has taken up that part of the portfolio at the moment. Whilst I believe this is well intentioned, and whilst we don't want to stop these miscellaneous measures going through, I do think that that we must take heed and ask: what is the unintended consequence here? If someone has a drug problem or an alcohol problem, or if someone has any sort of reportable that's already in legislation now, when they get that help—whether it goes through the VRB, DVA or anything—it is mandatory for the healthcare professional to report it into the chain of command, because there's a safety issue. You can't drive your truck in the morning if you're drinking in the morning. You can't handle weapons if you're addicted to ice.”
“This will affect the private soldier. This will affect the sailor and the aviator. This is not going to affect the senior officers. These unintended consequences will sit with the enlisted. As a former private soldier—never promoted—and now sitting here, I can feel the anxiety that they will have about something like this. Now, I've heard that there are other parts of provisions and bills that have a recommendation—or a kneejerk—that go to the CDF. I've heard people talk about that. Well, that's probably still a problem too. I don't know that saying it happens in other places means we should let it go through here. I do think that Darren Chester and his office have done some great work going through this.”
“We've seen it happen in real life where someone may not be travelling well. They're okay—they're functioning and ready to do their job—but, because of a kneejerk reaction because of bad policy, they get put on a no-weapons chit and can't go out in the field and can't deploy—all these things as an unintended consequence because we haven't properly gone through the legislation and policy that we do here. I don't want to slow down the passage of this, because it is part of the recommendations from the royal commission, but there are unintended consequences of not doing it right. I think having the VRB as the crux to notify the Chief of the Defence Force becomes quite challenging. I also don't believe that this has been taken out to the veteran or ADF community to ask what they think. Let's look at who this will affect the most.”
“For example, if someone has had a marriage breakdown—let's say a platoon sergeant in an infantry unit has had a marriage breakdown and it was decided through the advocate that it was to do with their service—they would then go through the claims process. If they found themselves at the Veterans' Review Board, I don't think it's an appropriate measure to then go to the Chief of the Defence Force with a notification that a platoon sergeant has sought professional help, has got that help and has gone to the VRB. If that now sits with the CDF, I think that's a gross overreach, because I would hate for that then to go back down the chain and lead to a situation where now that platoon sergeant can't become a warrant officer class 2 or can't be on deployment or receive promotion.”
“For example, if someone is a truckie and they have a drug problem and have spoken to a professional—they have gone through their process and put a claim in—that is their reportable, which would then go through to the unit and subsequently other people to make sure that that they are now not in the position where they could put someone's life at risk. We want to encourage people to see a mental health professional through non-liability health care. We want to encourage those who are doing it tough to be able to speak to someone without fear of their career being halted or of not being able to continue to serve.”
“It's our job in this parliament to make sure that we pass legislation that supports our current serving and our veterans—those that stand up for us, those that are there when they're called. As a whole, the Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous Measures No. 2) Bill 2025 looks fine from the outset, but there are parts of this bill that I personally don't agree with. I don't believe that, if someone has put a claim in and it gets reviewed by the Veterans' Review Board, there needs to be a notice sent to the Chief of the Defence Force. There are already mechanisms in place for reportables.”
“To all those that continue to wear the uniform and to our veterans and their families: the freedoms that we enjoy today are on the back of hard-fought battles, wars and sacrifices that you have made. On Anzac Day we say, 'Lest we forget.' We reaffirm our commitment to always remember those that have been killed in action, have died in training or have succumbed to their war within back here on home soil. On Remembrance Day we say the guns fell silent, but the guns haven't fallen silent since. In natural disasters—fires, floods and cyclones—our brave men and women are there. In peacekeeping missions—East Timor, Fiji and Solomon Islands—our brave men and women are there. In combat operations—Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, Korea and many more—our brave men and women were there.”
“We need to make sure that we're targeting the people that are doing the wrong thing and not punishing those that need that extra little hand-up to just kick arse at life. When I see my daughter, who went from saying no words to now being able to say, 'Love you, Dad,' I know how important the NDIS is to my family but also to other families around the country. I want to work closely with the minister to make sure that we are not cutting in the wrong areas or cutting people's funding. We want to make sure that we're bringing them up, getting them the support that they and their families need, by pointing at those that have done the wrong thing and making sure they can't continue to do it. The NDIS is so important. It's life-saving; it's life-changing.”
“by leave—I've been very blessed to be a father to two beautiful daughters: Astin, who's seven, and Emery, who's five. Coming into the new parliament, we were talking about different positions and jobs people wanted, and I asked to help out with the NDIS. I did that because my five-year-old, Emery, has level 3 autism and she needs the supports from the NDIS to be able to thrive. That early intervention has helped her so much. As I've travelled around the country, I have now seen what the NDIS has done and where we could be going but also the really bad, negative language that can be associated with the NDIS. People say, 'We need to make sure it's sustainable,' thinking of a dollar figure. But we need to make it sustainable for the people that need the therapies and the support.”
“One constituent wrote to me saying that they approached 13 insurers this year and only one actually offered them a policy to cover their ground-level unit complex. All this when the government's own Australian Reinsurance Pool Corporation has failed to come to Townsville to meet with the community. Despite its promise, the cyclone reinsurance pool has not reduced insurance premiums for North Queensland. Although repeatedly invited, the ARPC has not held any community forums in Townsville. We are calling for legislated, mandatory cost savings passed on by insurers, a real-time public dashboard showing insurer savings, and accessible consumer information—not a 94-page ACCC report. Residents want solutions—not advertisements. People can't afford insurance. Townsville deserves better from this Labor government.”
“People like David and Anita have tracked their premium renewals since 2023 and have noted that their base premiums have jumped nearly 42 per cent year on year, with their 2025-26 premium jumping to $6,000. Kate, who has lived in her Heatley property for more than 18 years and has not made a claim, has found herself paying over $700 per month for home insurance. Another real-life example was from Robyn, who lives in Kelso. Her recent insurance premium renewal for her house and contents premium increased from $3,036 to $13,690, which is a 350 per cent increase. This is highway robbery. These cost increases aren't just restricted to private insurance. They also affect strata insurance, with the increased challenge that unit owners have getting insurance.”
“No-one should have to choose between putting food on their table and being able to afford insurance. This is the unfortunate reality for the people that call Townsville home. Reports show that one in five Australians are considering ditching their home insurance in response to surging costs. Townsville is a region that has had its fair share of severe weather—we are resilient people—but recent polling highlights the fear many locals have of their insurance becoming unaffordable. The research states that 46 per cent of people believe that extreme weather events had already caused an increase in their insurance costs, even if their property wasn't affected. I have received many phone calls and emails from families struggling with cost-of-living pressures and deciding what costs to cut so that they can afford insurance.”
“Desecrating and setting fire to the Australian flag is a disgusting act designed to divide, demean and inflame. This amendment sends a clear and unequivocal message: we stand united under our flag, the Australian flag. Introducing a maximum penalty of two years imprisonment is a proportionate and necessary deterrent to this hateful and disgraceful act. Every time another grub on the street puts a torch to our national flag without consequence, it is an insult to every Australian, especially those who wore the flag on their shoulder while protecting our nation and those who were buried beneath it. I commend this amendment to the House.”
“They are the values that underpin our freedoms, our institutions and our national identity. Yet our laws are silent. The Flags Act 1953 offers no protection against desecration unless it involves damage to private property. That is an indefensible gap. If we accept that the Australian national flag represents our nation, then it must be protected in its own right by this amendment. Some argue that criminalising flag burning infringes on freedom of expression. That argument fundamentally misunderstands both freedom and responsibility. Freedom of expression has never been absolute. We already draw lines where conduct incites violence, promotes hatred or desecrates sacred and culturally significant symbols. Protecting our national flag is not censorship. It is an affirmation of national unity and mutual respect.”
“Over the past year, Australians have watched protesters deliberately desecrate and torch our national flag. For the overwhelming majority of Australians, this is not political expression; it is contempt. It is a deliberate act of disrespect from those who seek to undermine the very values upon which our nation is built. National polling shows that 77 per cent of Australians believe burning the Australian flag should be illegal. That is not a fringe view. It is the clear and overwhelming voice of the Australian people. The symbols on our flag—the Federation star, the Union Jack and the Southern Cross—tell our national story. They represent the unity of our states and territories, the rule of law, the foundations of our democracy and our place beneath the southern skies. These are not abstract concepts.”
“For generations of Australians, the flag has stood as a unifying emblem, raised in moments of triumph and lowered in moments of profound national grief. It is worn with pride on the shoulders of our Australian Defence Force, and it is draped with solemn honour over the coffins of those who never came home. I have buried friends, my brothers, beneath that flag—mates who were killed in combat, who died in training or who were taken by the battles that followed them home. I have stood at gravesites where the Australian flag was the final gesture of gratitude that a nation could offer. That flag does not represent an idea alone; it represents lives given, families broken and a debt that can never be repaid. That is why the growing scenes of flag burning and flag desecration on our streets strike such a raw national nerve.”
“I move the amendment circulated in my name: (1) Schedule 1, page 45 (after line 10), at the end of the Schedule, add: Part 8 — Burning or desecrating the Australian flag Criminal Code Act 1995 66 After Subdivision B of Division 80 of the Criminal Code Insert: Subdivision BA — Burning or desecrating the Australian flag 80.1AD — Burning or desecrating the Australian flag A person commits an offence if the person burns or desecrates the Australian National Flag (within the meaning of the Flags Act 1953 ). Penalty: Imprisonment for 2 years. The Australian national flag is far more than stitched fabric fluttering in the wind. It is woven into the very fabric of our nation. It is a living symbol of who we are, the values we hold and the price that has been paid in blood, service and sacrifice to preserve our way of life.”
“And for those yelling out, 'You demanded to come back early!'—rightly so. The first rule of any government is to keep its people safe. When the terrorist attack happened, the coalition said, 'Let's go back to parliament and pass laws or pass bills that keep people safe'. That is not blind commitment to support bad legislation. To be given the legislation on a Monday, to start hearings on a Tuesday, to then get passed within a week whilst receiving more than 7,000 submissions to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, which crashed the website—this didn't allow the people to have their voice. This is not good leadership and people deserve better from this Prime Minister.”
“We reaffirm our support for strong, targeted and enforceable measures to combat antisemitism, disrupt violent Islamist extremism and protect Australians, but legislation of this magnitude must be deliberate, precise and built on genuine consultation. It is critical that the Prime Minister now do what he failed to do earlier—lead. That means working constructively with all members of this House and, more importantly, with the Australian people to ensure this legislation should be and could be effective, proportionate and worthy of the freedoms it seeks to protect. National security demands unity and competence. Australia deserves nothing less. This bill punishes law-abiding citizens and law-abiding firearms licence holders and does not go to the root of the cause of why we're here.”
“The proposed national firearms buyback scheme and expanded import restrictions are poorly consulted, inadequately justified and lack the support of state and territory governments. Firearms regulation in Australia operates through cooperative federalism. Proceeding without the states' cooperation risks implementation failure and undermines an otherwise effective national framework. These measures unfairly burden lawful firearm owners, primary producers and sporting shooters while doing nothing to address the ideology responsible for the Bondi attack. Violent Islamist extremism, not firearms, caused the deaths of 15 innocent Australians.”
“For over a year warnings were ignored, concerns were minimised and communities were left exposed. Now, in the wake of a terrorist atrocity, the government has rushed forward a sweeping and poorly conceived legislative process. This bill is not the product of careful leadership; it is a kneejerk reaction to a failure to act when it mattered most. The bill is fundamentally flawed. It is unclear in its operation, inadequately safeguarded, poorly consulted on and lacking the precision required for legislation. Coalition members cannot support this bill. Coalition members unequivocally condemn antisemitism, hate motivated violence and violent Islamist extremism. However, we cannot support this firearms bill.”
“The protection of Australians in the defence of the nation is among the most serious responsibilities of any government. However, it must be stated plainly that the failure of leadership did not begin with this bill. It began more than 14 months before the attack, when Australia witnessed disturbing antisemitic protests on the streets of Sydney. These events were not ambiguous. They were not isolated. They were a clear warning sign that extremism and antisemitic intimidation were escalating. The time for decisive, targeted action was then. Instead, the Prime Minister chose inaction. In December 2024, as a Jewish synagogue burned in Melbourne following a suspected terror attack, the Prime Minister's decision to stay in Perth playing tennis became a symbol of a broader failure of leadership.”
“On 14 December 2025, Australia was confronted with a horrific terrorist attack at Bondi. This was an act of violent Islamist terrorism. Fifteen innocent people were murdered in an attack deliberately designed to terrorise the community and intimidate Australians far beyond the immediate victims. This was not random violence; it was a calculated, ideologically motivated assault on Jewish Australians and on the fundamental expectation that in this country people can worship, celebrate and gather in public without fear. I know firsthand what extremism looks like. I fought radical Islamic terrorism in Afghanistan, where Australians were killed and wounded. Many now live with the enduring consequences of that conflict. We fought terrorism there so we would not have to fight it here on Australian soil.”
“In the face of such darkness, we reaffirm that the bonds that tie Australia together—our shared values, our commitment to one another and our belief in peaceful, inclusive society—are far stronger than any act of terror could be. Don't judge us by our words in here; judge us by our actions and what we do in the following days.”
“During one of our nation's darkest moments, their instinctive bravery—confronting armed attackers, protecting vulnerable families, guiding people to safety and administering life-saving first aid under fire—stands as a powerful testament to the courage and compassion embedded in the Australian spirit. These selfless actions, undertaken without hesitation, saved lives and brought hope when fear and violence sought to divide us. In honouring their heroism, we must also turn our focus to the work that lies before us. We must stand united as a nation against hatred, against violence and against those who seek to tear at the fabric of our communities.”
“They remind us that love can be an act of courage, and they remind us that the legacy of a child like Matilda—her laughter, her kindness, her boundless spirit—can and must continue through the way we choose to treat one another. In the face of this horrific terrorist attack, I must also acknowledge and pay solemn tribute to the countless acts of courage shown by first responders and ordinary Australians who stepped forward in the most terrifying of circumstances. Police, paramedics, medical staff, community volunteers and bystanders alike ran towards danger to shield others, provide urgent care and restore order amid chaos, exemplifying what has been described as 'the best of humanity'.”
“That such a gentle and loving child could be lost in an act of such senseless violence is a tragedy that weighs heavy on our nation. Yet in the midst of their heartbreak, Matilda's family has offered the community an extraordinary example of grace. Her aunty urged all of us not to allow anger to be the legacy of this terrible event. Instead she asks that we honour Matilda by choosing compassion, by spreading the same joy and love that Matilda so freely gave. She said: Take your anger and … just spread happiness and love and memory for my lovely niece. In the darkest hours, this family has called on us to meet tragedy with humanity. Their words remind us that even in grief there can be hope.”
“Among them was Ahmed al-Ahmed, who confronted and disarmed one of the attackers, despite suffering gunshot wounds, along with many other courageous bystanders and first responders who placed themselves in the line of fire to protect strangers. As a father of two young girls, I would like to honour the life of 10-year-old Matilda, whose bright spirit was taken from us far too soon in the horrific act of terrorism. In speaking her name in this place, we acknowledge not only the depth of her family's grief but also the immeasurable light she brought to the world in her short life. Matilda was remembered by her loved ones as a joyous child, one who radiated warmth, kindness and boundless love. Her family shared how she spread happiness wherever she went, touching the lives of all who knew her.”
“This year, due to the 14 December Bondi terror attack, this celebration was moved to a private location, one away from the general public. This is not the Australia I know, love, represent and have fought for. As I stood with the community, I could see anger and pain in their eyes. Yet, as the menorah was lit that evening, it was clear that despite their grief there was steadfast belief that this was a moment to reaffirm that light will always triumph over darkness. I stand in this place today to mourn the 15 innocent lives so cruelly taken in the terrorist attack and to honour the families, friends and communities whose grief is beyond measure. Yet even in the midst of this horror we witnessed acts of extraordinary bravery of ordinary Australians who, without hesitation, ran towards danger to shield others from harm.”