Allegra Spender
Wentworth · Independent · Australia
“Estimates are between 0.5 per cent and two per cent of all abortions over 20 weeks. They are generally because of late diagnosed anomalies, genetic syndromes or severe fetal growth problems.”
“The bill is useful, it is technical, it's incremental, it has useful schedules, it has 'tell us once', it has streamlining and it has technical fixes. These are all good things, and I do not underestimate the effort that goes into getting useful changes like this.”
“Across Australia, we're seeing rising threats to women's access to abortion care. We see it in bills in state parliaments. We see it in the way some politicians talk about this issue, using misinformation and scare tactics to drive divisions, tools straight out of the Trump playbook.”
“They're saying they're waiting up to 18 months for the ATO to make a decision on how an investment would be treated, so the foreign capital just goes away. We need to change the culture here, and this is why—while I support this government's actions in this space—I urge the government to go further. This isn't about bad people.”
“I've seen firsthand how drone technology is at the forefront of some of these problems because government is slow to make decisions. There's no accountability from many government departments in terms of the speed of their decision-making.”
“I support the government's work on the fund, but I think it's currently around one tenth the size of the original 1990s National Competition Fund. If we expect that to move the dial, as it did back in the 1990s, we are going to have to put more firepower behind it.”
The complete record
Every one of 907 lines we hold for Allegra Spender, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 15 of 19.
“At a minimum, individuals affected by this cut-off should have the right to nominate advocates to pursue genuinely independent tribunal review on their behalf. On this basis, I support the coalition's amendments, which would remove the 20-year eligibility limit for tribunal review, ensuring fairness irrespective of the passage of time; require that the decision-makers proactively inform applicants of their tribunal review rights, guaranteeing transparency so that those eligible fully understand their rights and the appeal process; and repeal restrictions on who can be an applicant for review on behalf of affected persons. I believe that these are constructive and useful amendments to the bill and would make a material difference in improving the bill, which I believe is otherwise deeply flawed right now.”
“I believe that that restriction is unfair to those who seek that validation, fairness or correction decades after their service, and I have met some of those individuals in Wentworth and heard some of those stories of seeking that appeal and that support. I want to recognise, also, that the rejection of that sort of honour is very powerful in terms of its negative impact on individuals in this situation. I also support the repeal of overly restrictive provisions about who can submit review applications on behalf of our veterans. This flexibility is really important, ensuring that advocates, whether they are lawyers, veterans' representatives or appointed proxies, can act in support of those who, through age, illness or inability, may struggle to manage their own appeals.”
“This threshold effectively excludes recognition for veterans of conflict in Vietnam, Korea and Timor; some of the early Afghanistan conflict; and parts of the Iraq deployment, removing appeal avenues for the majority of tribunal applicants who have been heard between 2020 and 2023 and the majority of applicants who are current veterans in our community. I believe that is not appropriate. I believe that is unjust and may halt the recognition of veterans who have made valuable contributions to our country's, and other countries', safety. I believe that they should be allowed that right of appeal.”
“It is dangerous, but it is incredibly important work. Those medals really showcase people who have not just done the day-to-day work but gone above and beyond in the service of their country. When I started to examine the bill more closely, one of the biggest concerns that were raised with me is the proposed time limit on tribunal reviews. Under this bill, once an honour or award application has been rejected, no appeal to the independent tribunal would be possible if the relevant operation occurred 20 or more years ago.”
“It underpins morale in the defence community, it conveys institutional respect—respect from the government and respect from all Australians—for what has been given and presents a transparent and dignified process for acknowledging extraordinary service. Every Anzac Day I attend numerous services across the community, including, I think, one of the biggest in the country at North Bondi—a dawn service. I see the respect from the kids who get up at five o'clock in the morning to be there with thousands of other people and watch people with those medals either for themselves or for loved ones who are no longer with us. That respect—I think it's almost all, frankly, of the young kids in our community—is really important. It is about showing respect for those who make a contribution to this country which is not necessarily well paid.”
“Talking to the community that I just described, both the existing bases and also the RSL community—it's with their interests that I have approached this bill. I'll be honest. My community and I have enormous concerns about this bill. I don't doubt the government intention here and I don't want to attribute bad motives to this bill, but I need to recognise that, in its current form, I will not support this bill, because it does not have the support of the veterans community, and that is for good reason. The defence honours and awards system is of enormous importance to the defence community. This is not just about recognition of acts of service and sacrifice. It is also a social contract with those who have been trusted to serve and a recognition of what they have achieved.”
“I run past HMAS Kuttabul almost every weekend, and I see many members of the community out at Anzac Day services and other places. I have, myself, and I think the broader Wentworth community have enormous respect for everything that our defence community and also our veterans have given to this country. It's part of the reason why I decided to ask to join the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade in this term. I think now and from now on defence is going to become only more important to us in this country, and that means that we are going to have rely more on the good people who are in our defence forces, as well as our veterans, to look after us and to keep us safe in very uncertain times.”
“The defence community is a hugely important part of my community of Wentworth. I'm honoured to host three major defence communities in Wentworth, including HMAS Watson , Victoria Barracks and HMAS Kuttabul on Garden Island, as well as hosting a huge number of RSLs in my community, including the Paddington-Woollahra RSL Sub-Branch, the Bondi Junction-Waverley RSL Sub Branch, Rose Bay RSL Sub-Branch, North Bondi RSL Club, the New South Wales Police RSL Sub Branch, Bronte RSL Sub Branch, Coogee Randwick Clovelly RSL sub-Branch, the Waverley RSL Sub-Branch and the Eastern Suburbs Leagues Club. That really represents the depth of importance that the defence community has in my electorate. We host the east coast's main navy.”
“Finally, I'd like to acknowledge another wonderful organisation, Woollahra Colleagues Rugby Union Football Club. I recently met representatives to hear about their clubhouse upgrade plans, and I'm very glad to add my voice of support to this and their future endeavours. I want to congratulate them on their inaugural women's team and their longstanding support of the LGBTQIA+ community. The Colleagues club helped pave the way by creating Australia's first gay and inclusive rugby team, the Sydney Convicts, in 2004. Today, the Convicts are the most successful club to have competed in the Bingham Cup, inspiring players across Australia and the globe to push back against homophobia in sport and to show that sport is best when it is welcoming to all in the community.”
“Founded in Wentworth in 2020, Emerald City Kickball has since expanded to Perth and Melbourne, with Brisbane and New Zealand on the way. They have created more than a sports league; they have created a broad and inclusive environment and a vibrant community of LGBTQIA+ Australians who, through kickball, can connect, lead and thrive. Their impact extends beyond the field—supporting mental health initiatives, standing up for equality and partnering with festivals and research institutions. I am proud to have thrown the first pitch on their tournament day—it was quite an education for me—and to work alongside them in championing inclusivity. I wish them the best of luck with the awards and look forward to celebrating their fifth anniversary soon.”
“I want to take this opportunity today to congratulate some incredible sporting groups in my electorate of Wentworth. Firstly, the Easts Rugby Club's Beasties capped off their 125th year with four teams in the grand finals last weekend—and congratulations in particular to the third- and fourth-grade teams who came away with a win. While I'm gutted to see that the first-grade team lost to the member for McKellar's Warringah Rugby Club and that the Colts team lost to Randwick, I know how proud the community is of all the players. These losses take nothing away from the incredible year the Easts have had. I also want to congratulate Emerald City Kickball for their nomination for the Caption by Hyatt Connecting Communities Award from Awards Australia.”
“My question is for the Prime Minister. Today, former chief admiral of the Defence Force Chris Barrie reiterated the BOE Declaration's warning that climate change is the single greatest threat to security for Australia and for our immediate region, including our Pacific neighbours. You're attending the Pacific Island Forum next week. What assurances will you be providing to your Pacific counterparts that Australia's climate ambition will meet the threat level to the region and will be consistent with keeping temperature increases to 1.5 degrees?”
“The result is human lives. Policy which concerns migration and, indeed, the principles of our legal system, such as natural justice, should take great consideration and be part of an inquiry or, at the very least, public consultation and scrutiny before being put to the House or Senate. I urge the government not to rush through this amendment and to consider how this bill could be opened up for future violations. I urge the government to take time to consider the impact of this bill and refer it to the parliamentary committees. I cannot support this bill without the full consideration of its wide-ranging implications.”
“Decisions made based on wrong information or outdated law are then placed under review again in general legal proceedings. This is how our justice system functions. Any retrospective lawmaking should not be considered lightly, if at all, and I found this element deeply concerning, as it lies in conflict with the regular rule of law. All these issues and concerns are significant and require time. Again, I am deeply frustrated with the process that the government has undertaken with this bill. I have consulted with legal experts and refugee advocates, and they share my concerns that this legislation has not been adequately scrutinised. Proper scrutiny should include, but not be limited to, referral to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights and to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee. That is necessary.”
“The removal of this right to natural justice from decisions about deportation to a third country sets a precedent for the removal of basic legal protections for certain groups of people. The Law Council has said they are concerned about the removal of any kind of natural justice requirement by legislation. Therefore, the bill deserves careful scrutiny. Although I understand the government awards opportunities for procedural fairness throughout the visa cancellation process, I'm concerned that it is unjust to ask an individual to rely on previous documents or information without any opportunity to submit anything additional. Finally, on retrospective validation, I understand that this bill also has a capacity to validate previous decisions made by the government, which would now be incorrect following the NZYQ High Court decision.”
“I understand that the government may not intend to include this cohort, nor deport them without natural justice, but this legislation gives them the ability to do so, and this is deeply concerning. The second issue has been the removal of natural justice provisions. I'm concerned that this legislation has a capacity to set dangerous precedents in our legal system, eroding a cornerstone of our justice system with the removal of the right to natural justice and procedural fairness. Natural justice is a basic right to fairness and underpins Australian law, including being informed of and being able to respond to government decisions that determine a person's future.”
“That is why I supported the member for Curtin's motion yesterday to refer this bill to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights and why I will continue to call for this to be referred to the Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs with adequate time for stakeholders to contribute and respond to any inquiries. Let's go to these concerns—in the first instance, the ability to impact larger cohorts. I am concerned with the ability of this legislation to have ongoing ramifications for those outside the NZYQ cohort, including those on a bridging visa E. Some of these individuals have lived in Australia for a substantial amount of time, some with Australian partners or children.”
“I hold concerns that legislation so rushed may not solve the problem and could also have other implications, and I believe this to be an inappropriate way to legislate, considering how serious the impacts could be on peoples' lives and on our legal system. I'm concerned that this bill has the capacity to cause additional harm, removing the court's ability to apply natural justice when a decision has been made to remove an individual with a third-country reception agreement by legislation and having unintended consequences on lawful noncitizens outside the NZYQ cohort. Where these harms are possible, parliament has the responsibility to review the legislation in full, with public and stakeholder input.”
“This bill is just that: yet another piece of rushed legislation as part of an entirely shambolic patchwork that the government has been pushing through this parliament, and the previous one, following the High Court's NZYQ decision in 2023. Last term, we had a suite of measures that were introduced and passed without consultation. This legislation had to be patched up and fixed progressively when it inevitably resulted in unintended consequences. Legal experts and refugee advocates warned us against that process then and are doing so once again with this bill. It is unclear to me why this legislation must be rushed through so quickly.”
“My community values fairness, values due process and values the rule of law as well as security and compassion. I'm first and foremost concerned about this legislation in terms of that due process and the lack of consultation on this bill, the Home Affairs Legislation Amendment (2025 Measures No. 1) Bill 2025. We received a briefing on this bill just last week, and the government is expected to move to vote on it today. As we know too well, rushed legislation on issues that are critical, like immigration, which is policymaking about peoples' lives and peoples' futures, must be heavily scrutinised and reviewed in full.”
“I acknowledge that, in this parliament, our first priority must be to keep communities safe, and I recognise that the government is trying to pass legislation in an attempt to do so, following deep concern about the release of detainees from the NZYQ cohort following the High Court's 2023 decision on indefinite detention. I stood very clearly against indefinite detention, but I do recognise that there are some in the NZYQ cohort who have committed serious crimes. In some of those cases, there are security concerns which must be dealt with within this cohort. It is absolutely appropriate to ensure we have measures to keep our community safe. However, the government is responding to these issues, once again, with rushed legislation and a rushed response, and that is not the solution.”
“This payment was designed to help people in a crisis, but it's not doing its job, and there is an opportunity to reform it to make a difference for thousands of people while we tackle the raft of other actions we need to tackle under the rapid review of prevention.”
“The payment only applies to people who have left or who have stayed in their home. Under the current legislation, home doesn't include hostels, refuges, temporary accommodation or even tents. People are struggling right now; that sense of home and permanency is not available to some of the most vulnerable people in our community, and it should be mitigated in this legislation. Finally, there is a requirement in the legislation that applicants must prove that they are intending to establish a new home. But with the housing crisis and limited resources, that can be really hard for this particular group of vulnerable people to establish and to prove, and 14 per cent of people were rejected on the basis of this.”
“According to the 2025 Economic Inclusion Advisory Committee report, only half the eligible people actually receive the payment, with many rejected on technical grounds. This should be a lifeline payment to those in our community who need our help most, but it is wrapped up in red tape. So I'm asking the government, urging the government, to take action on this legislation and improve it for the benefit of those people who need it the most. There are three problems with the payment at the moment. The first is the seven-day claim period; for many people in the trauma of escaping violence, seven days goes by in a flash. This should be extended to 14 days at least. We do know that at least seven per cent of rejections were because they missed that seven-day deadline. The second issue is the definition of 'home'.”
“The federal government has a role, as do the states, in these areas; making sure that we are supporting young people who have experienced domestic violence but also young people who have experienced sexual violence; and, finally, making sure that we're really evaluating everything we do to see what really works. I would like to talk about one specific and really quite simple change which I believe could make a difference to thousands of women, and this is around crisis payment reform. The family violence crisis payment is a one-off, non-taxable payment for people in severe financial hardship and in extreme circumstances such as escaping a violent home. But right now the system is failing.”
“I welcome the government's decision to commission a rapid review into prevention strategies, and I acknowledge the work of the expert panel who delivered 21 evidence based recommendations. I do believe the government is committed to change, but we are still waiting on some of the decisions in relation to those reviews, and we need to keep that pressure up—and also at the state level to make sure that those actions that are dependent on the states are also being actioned. There are a number of areas where I feel the government does need to move faster, and I will call them out: gambling reform and alcohol reform.”
“In April, I tabled a petition from one of my constituents, Mel Arnost, signed by more than 25,000 Australians. It called for urgent national reforms to better protect women, including action on education, mental health, substance abuse and our court systems. I was proud to bring that petition to parliament, and I remain committed to standing up in this parliament and standing against violence against women. Women in my community have sent me here to keep the faith on this, to keep the pressure up on the government. There have been positive steps forward, and I respect and commend those, but we need to keep the faith in this parliament to make sure that action is sustained, that action is evidence based and that we truly make a difference to the scourge of intimate partner and domestic violence and sexual violence in our community.”
“We are living in a national crisis. One in four women and one in 14 men have experienced violence by an intimate partner. According to the Status of Women Report Card, 37 women were killed by a current or former partner in 2024 alone. These statistics no longer shock us. They are there now in the community. But it doesn't make them any less devastating. They have become expected and, for far too many people, a reality. Police commanders in my local area, where sometimes people think, 'Oh, this violence doesn't happen,' tell me that up to 50 per cent of their time is spent on domestic violence. I have heard countless heartbreaking accounts of women fleeing domestic violence, including that of Claire Austin, a local who tragically lost her life earlier this year to suspected domestic violence.”
“I move: That this House: (1) notes that: (a) one in four women and one in 14 men have experienced violence by an intimate partner since the age of 15 as of 2024; (b) 37 women were killed by a current or former intimate partner in 2024 according to the Status for Women Report Card; (c) the Report of the Rapid Review of Prevention Approaches, Unlocking the Prevention Potential: accelerating action to end family, domestic and sexual violence provided the Government with 21 recommendations which have not yet all been responded to; and (d) the Government has made some meaningful commitments including a $4.7 billion investment into a range of preventative measures and support services; and (2) calls on the Government to: (a) urgently respond to all recommendations put forward by the Rapid Review; and (b) expand the eligibility requirements of the Family Violence Crisis Payment to allow for victim-survivors to receive the support they need.”
“We all try to have lives beyond the concerns of our families and our work, and it is that gift of giving beyond yourself and beyond your immediate concerns which makes this country stronger, more successful and a more compassionate and happier place to live in. So thank you to everyone from B'nai B'rith for those decades of service to the country. It has made an enormous difference and, I hope, will continue to for another 80 years.”
“It is that message of compassion and of bridging divides that B'nai B'rith has championed throughout its work. Its championship of human rights has set an incredible example both to the local community in Wentworth and around the country as well. I think this has been a remarkable contribution to the broader country. I would also like to shout out a few people in the room. I don't have everyone's name on this list, but I would particularly like to shout out Anna Marks and Janine Zimbler as the president and immediate past president for what they have done. I'm not going to do any more names lest I leave out those who should be recognised. It is really important and wonderful that they've come to Canberra to celebrate this. I am really proud to be able to stand here and celebrate B'nai B'rith as well.”
“When I contemplate where we are right now as a country and some of the challenges that we do face as a country, how do we bring that forward? How do we deal with some of those? I think it is very much the values that B'nai B'rith has brought to the country that are the ones the ones we need to continue to live with. Last week I was speaking to members of the Australian Union of Jewish Students who were in Canberra, and I'm going to be speaking to members again this week, about how we fight antisemitism. This is not just about antisemitism; it's about how we continue to make sure that this country is the most successful and welcoming multicultural, multifaith country in the world. It is through programs like those championed by B'nai B'rith that we can continue to do that.”
“I had the enormous privilege of being in one of those programs recently at Rose Bay secondary College. I sat in the room, in the circles with the students, listening to Susan Warhaftig. She talked about her own experience as a two-year-old escaping the horrors of the Holocaust and World War II. Seeing how that lived history transformed the perspectives of those young people of all faiths and all backgrounds in the room was incredible. It was a beautiful and very uplifting experience. It is remarkable to see that Courage to Care has had that sort of impact on 400,000 students around Australia. That is absolutely critical. Again, that message of being an upstander, not a bystander, is one that I think is more important than ever.”
“It is remarkable to see the breadth of positive impact that B'nai B'rith has brought to the country over its 80 years, from retirement villages, shopping centres and social groups to really starting Holocaust education. I'm very privileged to have the Sydney Jewish Museum in my electorate. To know that Holocaust awareness and education was really born out of that 1981 Holocaust exhibition, which has now transformed to museums around the country, is absolutely critical and really speaks to the impact that B'nai B'rith has had on this country. Very much like the previous two speakers, I want to shout out Courage to Care, because that is the organisation and the program that I have seen having the greatest direct impact on students of all faiths in my electorate.”
“I'd also like to commend the member for Berowra for bringing forward this important motion, as well as support the words of the member for Macnamara. It is an absolute pleasure and honour to be able to stand here today and celebrate B'nai B'rith and everything that the organisation has brought to this country. One of the great privileges in my place, particularly in Wentworth, is to see firsthand the huge contribution the Jewish community has made to the strength of not only the community in Wentworth and not only the Jewish community but the entire country. B'nai B'rith is just a perfect example of this. Their core message I read as I was researching this is: Our core values place humanity at the centre of everything we do. And it is those core values that I believe are more important than ever in this country.”
“As I said at the start, I don't have all the answers on this, but I know that there is a problem. I know that some of the super fund regulations play into that. But there's a much bigger question of how we can get access to capital to venture firms. That's why the economics committee and the government need to be pursuing this issue, and I'll be pursuing it.”
“How do we investigate this? I held a round table recently with a bunch of venture firms, and I was grateful that the Minister for Industry and Innovation, Tim Ayres, also attended. There were really important discussions, I think, in terms of regulatory hurdles—things like RG 97 and Your Future, Your Super, and the structure of those two programs, which disincentives investment in venture firms. Now, let's be really clear. This isn't about trying to give money from super funds to dud investments. Private equity and venture capital have had on average a 15 per cent return over the last 10 years compared to 10 per cent for the ASX, so if there is more responsible investing in those sectors we could actually expect to see increased retirement savings for Australians, which is what super should be all about.”
“We have around a third of the capital in the venture sector compared to the US, per capita. We have around half of the venture-sector capital of the UK. What we are seeing in the big institutional areas of investment, like superannuation, is that they are reducing their allocation to venture, highly innovative, firms. The super funds have reduced their allocation to venture by around half in the last 10 years. I've heard from industry sources that no big super fund has invested in a new venture fund over the last five years. Basically, the door is closed. I come back to this question of productivity and supporting our most exciting and innovative businesses. If they are struggling so much on finance, how can we be sure that we're backing all the businesses that we can for the future? I think we can be sure that we're not.”
“They are issues that I hear about constantly from people in Wentworth, including from people that I recently surveyed on this issue. And I think this is an issue that I want to see the economics committee address and investigate. The second type of business I wanted to talk about, in terms of access to capital, is that of venture firms: those firms that are expected to grow fast and could be the big businesses of the future—those really super-innovative firms. What we have seen is that Australia is actually pretty good at building those firms. Actually, Australia has more unicorn companies—'unicorn' meaning having a billion-dollar valuation—per dollar invested than anywhere else in the world. But, despite our success at building these companies, we don't have a lot of capital that flows into this sector.”
“Australian businesses are struggling to access capital from our banks, who demand high securitisation and are more likely to ask you to put your house on the line if you're going to get a small business loan than those in other countries. What happens when small businesses can't access loans from the banks? They just go to other providers and have to be charged much higher rates. So my question to this House is: Is this a good idea? Is it a good idea that our small businesses are not able to access capital so easily? Is it a good idea that, on aggregate, we've been seeing lending to medium and large firms growing around 30 per cent in the last five years, whilst for small business it hasn't even budged? These are issues that face our economy.”
“I know from my own community how important our small and medium businesses are, but the truth is that, when you talk to them—whether they be family shops that have been passed on between generations or innovative businesses that are going to be the next big or medium businesses—they are not having the access to capital that they need, and I think we, collectively, need to turn our minds to it. Now, I don't have all the answers. I want to put this issue on the agenda. Let's start with bank lending. In the early or late nineties, around two-thirds of bank lending went to business; one-third went to mortgages. Forward through the few years to now and around two-thirds of bank lending goes to mortgages and only one-third to businesses.”
“Tonight I want to put on the table an issue that is really important to Australian businesses, the Australian community and the Australian economy, and that is: access to small and medium business financing. It's not working in this country. It needs to be much better. This is an issue that we just have not been discussing enough in this chamber and I believe it needs serious attention from across the parliament. Let's talk about why this matters. We know that small and medium businesses employ 42 per cent of the workforce in the private sector. There are 2.5 million small businesses in this country, and they contribute $500 billion to the economy.”
“This question is for the Prime Minister. The last summer was one of the hardest in memory for my Jewish community. It was terrorised by antisemitic attacks, including the attack on the Lewis Continental Kitchen. Today, we learned that the Iranian government was behind the Lewis Continental Kitchen attack, the Adass synagogue attack and potentially more. The security concerns of my community are real and justified. Will the government work with the community to keep them safe?”
“We need to build those systems supporting all students to thrive, regardless of background or belief. And we must keep on holding our institutions and ourselves to account, because our young people deserve better.”
“The tensions that sometimes boil over in this parliament feed into what goes on in our universities, and that sort of behaviour against any group is unacceptable. It is why the ombudsman and this new code matter. They provide a mechanism to hold universities accountable for creating a safe, inclusive and enriching environment. We must be prepared to use these tools, and strengthen them where needed, to ensure that all forms of harm are taken seriously, because our students deserve no less. Our universities are meant to be places of discovery and growth, not of fear. The universities accord bill is a strong step forward. It rightly shifts the burden from students to institutions. But we must go further. We must confront antisemitism with the same seriousness and structure we are applying to gender based violence.”
“I have heard from Chinese Australian students who faced some of those challenges, particularly at times where the relationship between China and Australia was poor. I know that this has been an issue for Aboriginal students. I know that Muslim students can and do face some hostility and prejudice at different parts of university at different times and have been targeted and marginalised. Vice-chancellors have shared with me some of the feedback they've had from international students who, after the big debate on international student numbers, were approached on campus—'You're stealing our houses. You're stopping me being able to get on in my life'—in a really aggressive and unacceptable way.”
“University is often the place where young Australians take their first step to adulthood. It's where they begin to find their voice as thinkers, citizens and future leaders. It's where we learn not just what to think but how to think and how to disagree well, to stretch ourselves, to be curious, to have our beliefs challenged in an environment that values respect. Our universities have a long tradition of being places of discovery and dialogue, but that can only happen if students feel safe to speak, question and grow. I have particular insight into the experience of Jewish students because of the community I represent, but I know all too well that they are not the only group that face harassment and harm on campus.”
“Universities should have obligations imposed on them concerning student and staff safety which ensure that education providers comply with recommendations of the National Student Ombudsman concerning antisemitism. Tomorrow I will again meet with AUJS, the Australasian Union of Jewish Student, and I want to commend the work they do in advocating for students and building community. Time and time again I have heard the same thing from Jewish students—that their complaints about antisemitism are being dismissed and ignored, that they feel afraid to make complaints in case it affects their grades or academic opportunities. I say this is not acceptable in any Australian institution and it must change. This is more than about just safety. It's about what kind of university experience we want for the next generation.”
“The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights inquiry into antisemitism at Australian universities delivered several recommendations to combat antisemitism on campus, including: … that government monitor the implementation of these recommendations and further recommends that the National Student Ombudsman review university practices to reduce antisemitism on campuses within twelve months of the tabling of this report. I thoroughly support those recommendations and I look forward to this review by the ombudsman and hope that this code will aid in enforcing the findings of the review. That experience of Jewish students in my community is why I do support the amendment put forward by the member for Berowra today calling for the development of a higher education code to prevent and respond to antisemitism.”
“Let's be clear: there will always be issues where different parts of our community feel different, where different individuals feel different and where people want to express their views strongly with protest and other actions. That is an extremely important part of our vigorous and democratic society. But that sort of desire to speak up on what is most important to you does not and should never condone abuse of any Australian on the basis of their religion, their culture or any other characteristic. We need to draw that distinction extremely sharply in our universities and across institutions in our country, because universities need to be places where every student—regardless of background, faith or belief—feels safe and supported.”