Palestine recognition a matter of ‘when, not if', says Chalmers, as Canada takes next step
As like-minded democracies move towards recognition of Palestinian statehood, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese had a call with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer to discuss the situation overnight, a day after the United Kingdom's major foreign policy shift.
'The leaders agreed on the importance of using the international momentum to secure a ceasefire, the release of all hostages and the acceleration of aid, as well as ensuring Hamas did not play a role in a future state,' an Australian government spokesperson said about the call.
The Albanese government has not rushed to follow France, the UK and now Canada in outlining its timeline for acknowledging Palestinian statehood, despite signalling it will recognise Palestine eventually.
Albanese is under mounting pressure from rank-and-file members and parts of the Labor caucus to join his international counterparts and add to global momentum. Former frontbencher Ed Husic this week said there was 'deep feeling' on the issue among his Labor colleagues and argued there was a moral imperative for Australia to take immediate steps towards recognition.
At the same time, Albanese has continued to meet with Jewish Australian groups in parliament and assured them recognition was not imminent. The federal opposition has also cautioned that there should be no conversation about recognition while Hamas still controlled Gaza and held Israelis hostage.
Chalmers on Thursday morning reiterated that Albanese and Foreign Minister Penny Wong would respond formally in due course. 'From a personal point of view, I welcome this momentum, this progress that's been made in the international community,' he said on Sky News.
'From an Australian point of view, recognition of the State of Palestine is a matter of when, not if. And so in that light, this progress, this momentum that we're seeing is welcome, but it's also conditional.'
He said Australia and Canada agreed that there could be no role for Hamas in the future leadership of a Palestinian state. 'We need to make sure that the hostages are released,' Chalmers said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Age
28 minutes ago
- The Age
Signs are already not good for Chalmers' productivity testament
This week, the festival of productivity kicked off in Canberra. The quasi-religious ritual will culminate in a productivity roundtable, at which an anointed few will gather to chant the catechism of economic reform. Policy festivus is celebrated in Australia when a political party is ascendent but its courage is in retrograde. This cargo cult-style ceremony mimics the Accord, a revered moment in Australian political lore when the Hawke-Keating government brought together the heads of the unions and business to reach a groundbreaking arrangement which, it is widely agreed, set Australia on the path of prosperity. The Albanese government has shown itself to be a great devotee of the Cult of the Accord. In its first term, it held the Jobs and Skills Summit, which lined up all the key players and ideas to simulate the process. Thanks to meticulous planning, the Rites of Full Employment performed at the summit confirmed the government in its conviction that it is the key player in creating jobs. Those who lack faith say that it is doubtful that the summit has led to actual employment outcomes. Aglow from its success, Treasurer Jim Chalmers launched his next project, ' Measuring What Matters', or the wellbeing budget. But Measuring What Matters had a problematic feature: it opened a window into a deeper theology. Namely, the question of what exactly wellbeing might be. If there is one thing the Albanese government, dominated by Labor Left, will not tolerate, it is the idea that there might be different conceptions of wellbeing than the one which it preaches. By the October 2022 out-of-cycle budget, wellbeing had been reduced to a tiny addendum. The following May, it was gone entirely, and the addendum from October had been scrubbed from the previous year's budget papers online. In July 2023, Treasury put the completed paper up online without fanfare. Measuring What Matters was shrunk and sunk. Not to be deterred – and it is quite refreshing to see a politician doggedly attempt to do his actual job rather than just play politics – Chalmers requested that the Productivity Commission produce a set of proposals for improving Australia's prosperity. This week the first of these dropped, marking the official start of the festival of productivity. Loading It's a doozy. The interim report on ' Creating a more dynamic and resilient economy' is brief (under 100 pages), simple and bold. It proposes lowering the tax on companies with revenue below $1 billion from 30 per cent to 20 per cent, replacing the resulting decrease in tax take with a 5 per cent tax on cashflow. Companies with a turnover above $1 billion would continue on the 30 per cent tax rate, as well as paying the cashflow tax. Regardless of size, all companies could immediately deduct capital investment – for instance in equipment needed to grow the business – against the cashflow tax. The genius of the cashflow tax, which would be the first of its kind in the world, is that it would encourage companies to buy what they need in Australia, creating a further benefit to the economy. In particular, overseas companies with revenue over $1 billion – those that could undertake their procurement anywhere in the world – would have an incentive to make their acquisitions in Australia in order to reduce their tax bills.
The Age
28 minutes ago
- The Age
In 30 years at The Age, I never wrote on Israel-Palestine. Now, I must
I began writing for The Age in 1981, and worked there for more than 30 years, the last 12 as religion editor. Among the 3 million or so words of mine the then-Fairfax papers published, none were about Israel/Palestine. That is partly because the conflict is not primarily religious. But more importantly, as a wise philosopher advised me, when it comes to such controversial and deeply divisive issues, unless you can include every necessary nuance it is better not to write at all. You are more likely to inflame. So I begin this article with a trigger warning: it is certain to offend almost everyone who is wedded to one side or the other. If for years I thought, 'how can I write about Israel/Palestine', today I think, 'how can I not?' On October 8, 2023, after the bestial Hamas attack on Israelis, I and millions of others believed Israel had a right to defend itself. Israel's increasingly callous response is steadily eroding that support. How do we cope with the realisation that the nation that we long saw as a beacon of hope in the Middle East has carried out calculated and unconscionable cruelty? What do we do when our side are the bad guys (or as bad as the other side)? For decades, Israel was the David facing the Goliath of the Arab world, fighting wars simply to survive in 1948, 1967 and 1973. Today Israel is the Goliath, mercilessly hammering a people who simply cannot resist. I am half-Jewish (my father's side). Our wider Dutch family was virtually extinguished in World War II: our family book has scores of entries that end 'died: Auschwitz' or Treblinka or Sobibor. I do not claim this gives me an atom of extra moral authority, but it exacerbates my horror. I ardently support Israel's right to exist. If that makes me a Zionist, then I suggest every decent human being should be. But I simply cannot equate that with today's Israeli government. Both Israel and Hamas are firing out propaganda as fast as they can, and one has to be wary about accepting claims. Yet the systematic destruction of Gaza and its starving children are clearly not invented, while it is simply unfathomable that Israeli troops are shooting desperate Palestinians as they line up for scarce aid or endorsing awful settler violence on the West Bank. There are claims and counter-claims on these issues, but it is the fact the violence exists that matters.
The Age
28 minutes ago
- The Age
Trump's crypto mania poses a risk for our super
This distinct lack of guardrails, and the well-known volatility of crypto – data shows that over the past decade the cryptocurrency market has been almost five times as volatile as the US sharemarket – is one thing when it's young investors who are eager to take high risk for possible high reward. But it's another when people's retirements are involved. One of the most likely reasons for this loosening of regulations (gold and private investments are also set to be added to what US funds can invest in) is that the industry is under increasing pressure globally to find new investment options and maximise returns because of our ageing population. The pension system in the UK, for example, is expected to reach a crisis point within the next two decades, with many people predicted to retire with less than they may have expected. Loading You can see, then, why cryptocurrency suddenly looks promising. But here is where another likely reason for this shift also arises and, depending on your politics, is either a problem so glaring it might as well be an entire herd of elephants in the room, or is simply shrewd business ingenuity. The US government is currently led by a man who, along with his family, has a bitcoin mining farm and reserve. They have launched their own crypto coins, stablecoin and crypto trading app. It's estimated that $US2.9 billion ($4.5 billion) of the Trump family's wealth – roughly 40 per cent – is tied to their digital investments. And on Wednesday, the White House launched a 160-page document outlining how the government will bring to life the president's promise to bolster digital assets. Trump isn't just pro-crypto, he's driving the pro-crypto bus. Again, investing and being hungry for risk is one thing. But when the money being invested is retirement funds, it's a different ball game. Considering cryptocurrencies are still such a new asset class, there's no long-term performance data to assess their suitability for super investments. But already, there is a cautionary tale to look to. In 2022, a Canadian pension plan for teachers that invested in crypto lost $147 million in invested funds following the collapse of digital currency exchange FTX. While retirement funds are worth billions and $147 million might not sound like all that much in the grand scheme of things, try telling that to the hardworking teacher who was a year away from retirement and suddenly faced working longer due to bad investments. Currently in Australia, the only way to invest in crypto using superannuation is through a self-managed fund. But two things are worth noting here. The first is that there are more than 600,000 self-managed funds, and that with more than $750 billion in assets, they represent roughly a third of our national super sector. The second is that in February, soon after Trump's return to the White House, Australia's industry leaders and Treasurer Jim Chalmers travelled to the US for a 'super summit', in an attempt to try to win over American financial executives and the US government. Loading Currently, about $US400 billion of our super is invested in US assets, which translates to roughly 14 per cent of all Australian investments. However, that's expected to grow to more than $US1 trillion over the next decade. Whether these assets will one day include crypto remains to be seen. But the fact that American funds – which have the biggest pool of money in the world – now can more freely look to crypto than ever before, and that Australia is so hungry to remain economically close to the US, is something that should make us sit up and pay attention. Victoria Devine is an award-winning retired financial adviser, bestselling author and host of Australia's No.1 finance podcast, She's on the Money. She is also founder and director of Zella Money.
