‘Action:' Albo hits out on synagogue fire
While quizzed by journalists in Hobart on Tuesday, the Prime Minister snapped back at a reporter who said Jewish community leaders had claimed the government's response was 'insufficient'.
The questions were in response to an alleged arson attack on the East Melbourne Synagogue on Friday night,
'Who is saying that?' asked in response, and said he had spoken to community leaders on Saturday.
'Every time there has been a request, it has been met, expeditiously,' he said.
'On Saturday, one of the reasons why this gentleman has been caught so quickly is because the CCTV that was in place there was as a direct result of Commonwealth Government funding.' The East Melbourne synagogue was set ablaze on Friday night in an alleged arson attack. NewsWire/ Valeriu Campan Credit: News Corp Australia The blaze damaged the doors. NewsWire/ Valeriu Campan Credit: News Corp Australia
Mr Albanese also rejected calls for him to convene national cabinet in response to Friday's alleged arson attack.
'Every time an issue comes up, people say, let's have a national cabinet. Let's be clear. What people want is not a meeting. They want action,' Mr Albanese said.
Mr Albanese's comments comes after Executive Council of the Australian Jewry president Alex Ryvchin urged the government to adopt its 15-point plan to 'defeat anti-Semitism' in Australia.
The plan includes calls for anti-Semitism education in the national curriculum and urges Labor to declare a National Emergency and establish a Joint Counter-Terrorism Taskforce to 'fight against anti-Semitic terror before we have a major terror attack in this country'. Sussan Ley said Labor had not committed to enough action. NewsWire/ David Crosling Credit: News Corp Australia
Speaking later on Tuesday following a visit to the East Melbourne Synagogue, Sussan Ley maintained the Albanese government was not doing enough to protect Jewish-Australians.
'What I hear from the community is there have been many task forces, there have been many talkfests, many conversations and many words. What they are really calling for is action,' she said, alongside shadow attorney-general Julian Leeser and finance spokesperson James Paterson.
Ms Ley also called for stronger state hate speech laws, which would prohibit people from chanting phrases like 'death to Israel,' and said calls for a national cabinet meeting to tackle anti-Semitism were a 'good suggestion'.
'There shouldn't be an ability for people to chant the words 'death' and I won't complete the phase, on the streets of Melbourne, and it just be accepted,' she said.
'It is not a protest, it is hate – pure hate and we need to have laws and levers and I would respectfully ask the Premier of Victoria to consider how she might instruct law enforcement in a way that allows a stronger intervention.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News AU
6 minutes ago
- Sky News AU
‘They think it is their win forever': Younger Aussie voters leaning left
On tonight's episode of Paul Murray Live, Sky News host Paul Murray discusses young Australians leaning left, cost of living, US politics and more. 'Of course, there are many divisions between all different types of people in the country but we know when it comes to elections there is a pretty prominent difference between how the young voters see Australia and how older voters,' Mr Murray said. 'Basically, half of the country under the age of 50, half over, and the left after particularly a big win … they think it is their win forever.'
The Advertiser
an hour ago
- The Advertiser
Can pensioners really be 'wealthy'? One economist reckons they are
The attacks on Baby Boomers, labelling them as "wealthy" to the detriment of "families and young people" just because their home has increased in value, needs to stop. Brendan Coates, an economist with the Grattan Institute, was given a soap box on July 24 to air concerns "wealthy pensioners" should be penalised to benefit the rest of Australian society. Perhaps Brendan forgets people over the age of 65 are also valued members of society, and if they're eligible for the age pension (the current base payment being $27,333 a year for singles and $41,210 for couples, before tax is taken out) it's because they are just scraping by. Compulsory super only began in 1992 at 3 per cent, whereas Brendan enjoys 12 per cent as of July 1. The age pension is below minimum wage, and far below the wage of an economist (in excess of $100,000 according to "[Retirees] can be in Potts Point or Toorak with a $5m house and receive the same pension that a person in a $500,000 unit in Bendigo or Bathurst is receiving," he is quoted as saying in the Australian Financial Review. "People with substantial wealth are receiving the pension who arguably don't need it." Read more from The Senior: Mr Coates believes a retiree's family home (regardless if they bought it 40 years ago for next to nothing, then for the pandemic to jack up the land value) should be included in the pension assets test to better help "those who need it". But Brendan isn't a fan of retirees with superannuation either. A Grattan Institute report by Brendan Coates, released a day after his quotes around "wealthy pensioners", ironically called for more tax on superannuation funds. Not sure about you Brendan, but my grandparents on the Gold Coast have lived far longer than they expected and are now living day to day, as their meagre super dwindled to nothing. Pensioners and self-funded retirees are being slammed every which way as the "cash cows" of society, that should be pushed out of their homes - "and downsize" - to make way for a seemingly more important demographic: anyone under the age of 50. In 2025, around 58 per cent of Australians aged over 65 (around 2.4 million people) receive either the full or part age pension. But why would someone not have enough super to retire on comfortably? Compulsory super only came into play 30 years ago (around 10 years after Brendan Coates was born). "While Australians have reason to feel proud of the success of Australia's superannuation system ... the need for review, refinement and reform continues. An example is the retirement savings of Australian women," the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority states on their website. Older women are the fastest-growing group of homeless people in Australia. The 2021 Census reported a 6.6 per cent increase to women over 55 experiencing homelessness. Divorce and lack of super (due to raising children) are a big factor. Banks also won't give older people a loan for a home and rents have skyrocketed. The Superannuation Guarantee, with a mandatory three per cent contribution rate for employers came into effect in 1992 - nearly 20 years after reader of The Senior Suzanne G finished high school. "As a woman of 67 soon 68 ... back in 1974 when I finished school there was no superannuation," the retired pensioner told The Senior. She said she's worked all her life, owns her own home, and had a "meagre private super" which was cashed in some years ago to complete home renovations. The 1980s was the birth of superannuation for Aussies, but in the beginning, it was generally limited to public servants and white collar employees of large corporations. It was only in 2003 that provisions came in to allow the splitting of superannuation between divorcing or separating spouses, while 2007 saw investment losses for Australian superannuation funds of more than $200 billion thanks to the global financial crisis (GFC). The other flipside to all this: is if an older person does want to keep working they are either financially penalised (if they're on the age pension) or they're discriminated against by employers (according to the research by the Human Rights Commission and Australian Human Resources Institute). Who's with me and standing up for the rights of our wise elders? Retirees are humans too, with basic needs like anyone else. It's time the generations before them showed some respect. Share your comments below if you agree ... or disagree ... The attacks on Baby Boomers, labelling them as "wealthy" to the detriment of "families and young people" just because their home has increased in value, needs to stop. Brendan Coates, an economist with the Grattan Institute, was given a soap box on July 24 to air concerns "wealthy pensioners" should be penalised to benefit the rest of Australian society. Perhaps Brendan forgets people over the age of 65 are also valued members of society, and if they're eligible for the age pension (the current base payment being $27,333 a year for singles and $41,210 for couples, before tax is taken out) it's because they are just scraping by. Compulsory super only began in 1992 at 3 per cent, whereas Brendan enjoys 12 per cent as of July 1. The age pension is below minimum wage, and far below the wage of an economist (in excess of $100,000 according to "[Retirees] can be in Potts Point or Toorak with a $5m house and receive the same pension that a person in a $500,000 unit in Bendigo or Bathurst is receiving," he is quoted as saying in the Australian Financial Review. "People with substantial wealth are receiving the pension who arguably don't need it." Read more from The Senior: Mr Coates believes a retiree's family home (regardless if they bought it 40 years ago for next to nothing, then for the pandemic to jack up the land value) should be included in the pension assets test to better help "those who need it". But Brendan isn't a fan of retirees with superannuation either. A Grattan Institute report by Brendan Coates, released a day after his quotes around "wealthy pensioners", ironically called for more tax on superannuation funds. Not sure about you Brendan, but my grandparents on the Gold Coast have lived far longer than they expected and are now living day to day, as their meagre super dwindled to nothing. Pensioners and self-funded retirees are being slammed every which way as the "cash cows" of society, that should be pushed out of their homes - "and downsize" - to make way for a seemingly more important demographic: anyone under the age of 50. In 2025, around 58 per cent of Australians aged over 65 (around 2.4 million people) receive either the full or part age pension. But why would someone not have enough super to retire on comfortably? Compulsory super only came into play 30 years ago (around 10 years after Brendan Coates was born). "While Australians have reason to feel proud of the success of Australia's superannuation system ... the need for review, refinement and reform continues. An example is the retirement savings of Australian women," the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority states on their website. Older women are the fastest-growing group of homeless people in Australia. The 2021 Census reported a 6.6 per cent increase to women over 55 experiencing homelessness. Divorce and lack of super (due to raising children) are a big factor. Banks also won't give older people a loan for a home and rents have skyrocketed. The Superannuation Guarantee, with a mandatory three per cent contribution rate for employers came into effect in 1992 - nearly 20 years after reader of The Senior Suzanne G finished high school. "As a woman of 67 soon 68 ... back in 1974 when I finished school there was no superannuation," the retired pensioner told The Senior. She said she's worked all her life, owns her own home, and had a "meagre private super" which was cashed in some years ago to complete home renovations. The 1980s was the birth of superannuation for Aussies, but in the beginning, it was generally limited to public servants and white collar employees of large corporations. It was only in 2003 that provisions came in to allow the splitting of superannuation between divorcing or separating spouses, while 2007 saw investment losses for Australian superannuation funds of more than $200 billion thanks to the global financial crisis (GFC). The other flipside to all this: is if an older person does want to keep working they are either financially penalised (if they're on the age pension) or they're discriminated against by employers (according to the research by the Human Rights Commission and Australian Human Resources Institute). Who's with me and standing up for the rights of our wise elders? Retirees are humans too, with basic needs like anyone else. It's time the generations before them showed some respect. Share your comments below if you agree ... or disagree ... The attacks on Baby Boomers, labelling them as "wealthy" to the detriment of "families and young people" just because their home has increased in value, needs to stop. Brendan Coates, an economist with the Grattan Institute, was given a soap box on July 24 to air concerns "wealthy pensioners" should be penalised to benefit the rest of Australian society. Perhaps Brendan forgets people over the age of 65 are also valued members of society, and if they're eligible for the age pension (the current base payment being $27,333 a year for singles and $41,210 for couples, before tax is taken out) it's because they are just scraping by. Compulsory super only began in 1992 at 3 per cent, whereas Brendan enjoys 12 per cent as of July 1. The age pension is below minimum wage, and far below the wage of an economist (in excess of $100,000 according to "[Retirees] can be in Potts Point or Toorak with a $5m house and receive the same pension that a person in a $500,000 unit in Bendigo or Bathurst is receiving," he is quoted as saying in the Australian Financial Review. "People with substantial wealth are receiving the pension who arguably don't need it." Read more from The Senior: Mr Coates believes a retiree's family home (regardless if they bought it 40 years ago for next to nothing, then for the pandemic to jack up the land value) should be included in the pension assets test to better help "those who need it". But Brendan isn't a fan of retirees with superannuation either. A Grattan Institute report by Brendan Coates, released a day after his quotes around "wealthy pensioners", ironically called for more tax on superannuation funds. Not sure about you Brendan, but my grandparents on the Gold Coast have lived far longer than they expected and are now living day to day, as their meagre super dwindled to nothing. Pensioners and self-funded retirees are being slammed every which way as the "cash cows" of society, that should be pushed out of their homes - "and downsize" - to make way for a seemingly more important demographic: anyone under the age of 50. In 2025, around 58 per cent of Australians aged over 65 (around 2.4 million people) receive either the full or part age pension. But why would someone not have enough super to retire on comfortably? Compulsory super only came into play 30 years ago (around 10 years after Brendan Coates was born). "While Australians have reason to feel proud of the success of Australia's superannuation system ... the need for review, refinement and reform continues. An example is the retirement savings of Australian women," the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority states on their website. Older women are the fastest-growing group of homeless people in Australia. The 2021 Census reported a 6.6 per cent increase to women over 55 experiencing homelessness. Divorce and lack of super (due to raising children) are a big factor. Banks also won't give older people a loan for a home and rents have skyrocketed. The Superannuation Guarantee, with a mandatory three per cent contribution rate for employers came into effect in 1992 - nearly 20 years after reader of The Senior Suzanne G finished high school. "As a woman of 67 soon 68 ... back in 1974 when I finished school there was no superannuation," the retired pensioner told The Senior. She said she's worked all her life, owns her own home, and had a "meagre private super" which was cashed in some years ago to complete home renovations. The 1980s was the birth of superannuation for Aussies, but in the beginning, it was generally limited to public servants and white collar employees of large corporations. It was only in 2003 that provisions came in to allow the splitting of superannuation between divorcing or separating spouses, while 2007 saw investment losses for Australian superannuation funds of more than $200 billion thanks to the global financial crisis (GFC). The other flipside to all this: is if an older person does want to keep working they are either financially penalised (if they're on the age pension) or they're discriminated against by employers (according to the research by the Human Rights Commission and Australian Human Resources Institute). Who's with me and standing up for the rights of our wise elders? Retirees are humans too, with basic needs like anyone else. It's time the generations before them showed some respect. Share your comments below if you agree ... or disagree ... The attacks on Baby Boomers, labelling them as "wealthy" to the detriment of "families and young people" just because their home has increased in value, needs to stop. Brendan Coates, an economist with the Grattan Institute, was given a soap box on July 24 to air concerns "wealthy pensioners" should be penalised to benefit the rest of Australian society. Perhaps Brendan forgets people over the age of 65 are also valued members of society, and if they're eligible for the age pension (the current base payment being $27,333 a year for singles and $41,210 for couples, before tax is taken out) it's because they are just scraping by. Compulsory super only began in 1992 at 3 per cent, whereas Brendan enjoys 12 per cent as of July 1. The age pension is below minimum wage, and far below the wage of an economist (in excess of $100,000 according to "[Retirees] can be in Potts Point or Toorak with a $5m house and receive the same pension that a person in a $500,000 unit in Bendigo or Bathurst is receiving," he is quoted as saying in the Australian Financial Review. "People with substantial wealth are receiving the pension who arguably don't need it." Read more from The Senior: Mr Coates believes a retiree's family home (regardless if they bought it 40 years ago for next to nothing, then for the pandemic to jack up the land value) should be included in the pension assets test to better help "those who need it". But Brendan isn't a fan of retirees with superannuation either. A Grattan Institute report by Brendan Coates, released a day after his quotes around "wealthy pensioners", ironically called for more tax on superannuation funds. Not sure about you Brendan, but my grandparents on the Gold Coast have lived far longer than they expected and are now living day to day, as their meagre super dwindled to nothing. Pensioners and self-funded retirees are being slammed every which way as the "cash cows" of society, that should be pushed out of their homes - "and downsize" - to make way for a seemingly more important demographic: anyone under the age of 50. In 2025, around 58 per cent of Australians aged over 65 (around 2.4 million people) receive either the full or part age pension. But why would someone not have enough super to retire on comfortably? Compulsory super only came into play 30 years ago (around 10 years after Brendan Coates was born). "While Australians have reason to feel proud of the success of Australia's superannuation system ... the need for review, refinement and reform continues. An example is the retirement savings of Australian women," the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority states on their website. Older women are the fastest-growing group of homeless people in Australia. The 2021 Census reported a 6.6 per cent increase to women over 55 experiencing homelessness. Divorce and lack of super (due to raising children) are a big factor. Banks also won't give older people a loan for a home and rents have skyrocketed. The Superannuation Guarantee, with a mandatory three per cent contribution rate for employers came into effect in 1992 - nearly 20 years after reader of The Senior Suzanne G finished high school. "As a woman of 67 soon 68 ... back in 1974 when I finished school there was no superannuation," the retired pensioner told The Senior. She said she's worked all her life, owns her own home, and had a "meagre private super" which was cashed in some years ago to complete home renovations. The 1980s was the birth of superannuation for Aussies, but in the beginning, it was generally limited to public servants and white collar employees of large corporations. It was only in 2003 that provisions came in to allow the splitting of superannuation between divorcing or separating spouses, while 2007 saw investment losses for Australian superannuation funds of more than $200 billion thanks to the global financial crisis (GFC). The other flipside to all this: is if an older person does want to keep working they are either financially penalised (if they're on the age pension) or they're discriminated against by employers (according to the research by the Human Rights Commission and Australian Human Resources Institute). Who's with me and standing up for the rights of our wise elders? Retirees are humans too, with basic needs like anyone else. It's time the generations before them showed some respect. Share your comments below if you agree ... or disagree ...
Sky News AU
2 hours ago
- Sky News AU
Leftist media ‘pushing' anti-Israel narratives in the US
Filmmaker Ami Horowitz discusses new polls showing a shift in public opinion against the Israeli government, attributing the change to leftist media promoting anti-Israel narratives. 'It's a problem, it's not good, let's be honest about it,' Mr Horowitz told Sky News host Rita Panahi. 'There's been a dramatic shift in public opinion in the US, and Israel needs the US, it's their number one ally … you cannot afford to lose the American people. 'While those numbers are real, it's CNN and the other players in the mainstream media that are pushing these anti-Israel narratives, which have led to the decrease in support in the US.'
