Key PointsAntisemitism envoy Jillian Segal released a 20-point plan to combat hostility towards Jewish Australians last week.If adopted, universities and artists could lose government funding if they don’t act against antisemitism.Labor MP Ed Husic has cautioned against an approach that used “threats of funding”.Australia “shouldn’t necessarily get hung up” on antisemitism definitions, former cabinet minister Ed Husic says, but has cautioned against a “heavy-handed” response following a report from the federal antisemitism envoy.Last week, envoy Jillian Segal released a 20-page plan to combat hostility towards Jewish Australians, which included adopting a definition of antisemitism from the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) before taking coordinated action.Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has said he will consider the plan’s recommendations but has not committed to it in full. Education Minister Jason Clare has said the government was carefully considering it as it awaits a similar report from the special envoy for Islamophobia next month.
Segal, however, has said the definition clearly states what is and isn’t problematic. Some Jewish groups, including the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, have called for the plan to be adopted in full.
Husic cautioned against an approach that used “threats of funding”, following recommendations that universities and artists could have government funding pulled if they failed to act against antisemitism.The report also proposed cutting back funding from public broadcasters if they are found to be perpetuating distorted representations of Jews or not balanced in their reporting.”I would be very careful. I would much prefer us finding ways to bring people together rather than being heavy-handed in response,” Husic said.He also said “we shouldn’t necessarily get hung up on definitions”.
“I just think the issue of definition instantly brings into question whether or not people will be able to raise their concerns about the actions, for example, of what the Netanyahu government is doing in Gaza and how that would be treated under a definition,” he said.
The special envoy’s report also recommended uniform education around the Holocaust and what constitutes antisemitism, an inquiry into antisemitism on university campuses and better police training to prevent and respond to threats.
Universities Australia committed to considering the report’s recommendations.
Definition author and Liberal MP raise free speech concerns
IHRA’s definition, finalised in 2016, states: “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.””It has been a very helpful tool and helpful guideline. No-one in Australia, though, is proposing that [it] should be legislated or that there should be consequences under the law for transgressing IHRA,” he told ABC’s Radio National on Tuesday.
“I don’t think anyone should propose that. I don’t think that’d be consistent with Australia’s approach to free speech.”
Liberal senator James Paterson has raised free speech concerns over legislating the antisemitism definition. Source: AAP / Mick Tsikas
Among critics cautioning the Australian government from adopting the IHRA definition into law is its author, Kenneth Stern, who labelled the prospect “a disaster”.On Monday, he said the definition is “being weaponised” to go after free speech, including pro-Palestinian speech.Upon suggestions that institutions could lose funding, he drew parallels to McCarthyism in the 1950s. The period during which individuals under suspicion of communist sympathies lost jobs and were publicly shamed, particularly in the US, is considered to have hindered free speech.”What that does is not only harm democracy, it blinds us to how antisemitism actually works,” Stern said.
Source
