'We're not alone': People in Gaza are reacting to 'best march' on Harbour Bridge
"We know what is happening outside and we are following everything. The best march I have seen is the bridge march," he told SBS News.
Mohammed Hamad and his daughter Hira saw the Sydney Harbour Bridge protest from Gaza. Credit: X/ Mohammed Hamad NSW Police said initial estimates put the crowd at 90,000 while rally organisers, the Palestine Action Group, estimated the figure was closer to 300,000.
'We are not alone' Tamer Nahed, a web developer from north Gaza, wrote on social media that witnessing the "massive protest" gave his parents a sense of hope. "I showed them the massive protests that took place in Sydney. I told them, there are still people who care about us. We are not alone," he wrote on X.
"We watched together as people stood in the rain, in this cold weather, chanting for us — for justice, for truth. And in my parents' eyes, I saw something that had been missing for a long time … I saw hope return, even if just a little."
Nahed expressed his gratitude towards the protesters, writing that he often feels forgotten by the world when watching the news.
"Thank you to everyone who marched today, to everyone who raised their voice for us. You didn't do it in vain. You gave us something that words can't fully capture," he wrote.
More protests ahead, organisers say One of the organisers told reporters more protests are being planned, but that a repeat crossing of the Sydney Harbour Bridge won't happen anytime soon, according to the Australian Associated Press.
Palestine Action Group's organiser Joshua Lees said on Sunday: "We want to build on this massive momentum we have now."
"His stance is pretty clear and he's passed a raft of anti-protest legislation already," Lees said. "We're going to have to keep fighting for our rights to demonstrate." Speaking to ABC radio on Tuesday morning, Minns said he accepted the reason for the protest, but that "common sense has to play a role". "I'm not questioning the motives of many of the protesters. I accept that this is a protest that many people want to have," he said.
"My argument here is I can't close down the central artery for a city as big as Sydney — even on a short-term basis, but even if we had a massive heads up to do it."
'An extraordinary march' Speaking about the protest, Foreign Minister Penny Wong acknowledged the anger and distress felt by some Australians. "That was an extraordinary march and I think it demonstrates what we all feel," she told the ABC's 7.30 program. "I know that Australians are feeling distressed, angry, upset, really horrified by what they're seeing in Gaza. I certainly share that distress. So do ministers in the government." The Palestine Action Group said it is planning a national day of action scheduled for 24 August, along with more protests.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
an hour ago
- ABC News
PBS wait times a more urgent issue than Donald Trump's potential pharmaceutical tariffs, peak medicines body warns
Excessive wait times for medicines to be listed on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) are a much greater threat to the sector than US President Donald Trump's far-reaching tariffs, according to the peak industry body, which has warned people could die waiting for treatment. The Albanese government is frantically working to shield Australia from Donald Trump's ever-expanding tariffs, with the US president now flagging a possible 250 per cent tariff on pharmaceuticals, one of Australia's largest export products to the US. "We'll be putting a, initially, small tariff on pharmaceuticals. But in one year … it's going to go to 150 per cent and then it's going to go to 250 per cent because we want pharmaceuticals made in our country," Mr Trump told CNBC on Wednesday local time. But Medicines Australia CEO Liz de Somer said a more pressing concern was the process behind listing new medicines on the PBS, with a median wait time of 22 months for a new medicine to land on the scheme once it is approved by the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA). "And this will have a far greater effect on the Australian system than anything else." When drugs are placed on the PBS, patients are able to receive important and sometimes lifesaving medicines at a small portion of the cost — currently just over $30. The rest of the cost is covered by the federal government. But patients, advocacy groups and pharmaceutical companies argue the process leading up to the PBS listing is overly complex, takes too long and involves excessive red tape. The first complete review of the system in 30 years was handed to the federal government last year, making a raft of recommendations to streamline processes so people could access medicines earlier. The recommendations included expanding access to medicines already subsidised for common cancers to other cancers, when that is backed by evidence. The review also concluded that if pharmaceutical companies applied to have their medications approved by the TGA and placed on the PBS at the same time, 90 per cent of promising new medicines could be listed within six months of TGA registration. Federal Health Minister Mark Butler heralded the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) review as "visionary" but has yet to formally respond to its findings, instead setting up an advisory group to help guide the government's next steps. Rare Cancers Australia CEO Christine Cockburn said urgent action was required, with many people unable to afford lifesaving medication that can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. "They sometimes access superannuation, which of course that is not what superannuation is for, or they remortgage their houses. "Crowdfunding is not uncommon in cancer treatment spaces, which of course comes with a terrible loss of dignity. It's a terrible thing to have to do, and there are people as well who just have to go without because they can't do any of those things." The time it takes to list medications on the PBS is a long-held gripe of US pharmaceutical companies. They also argue the scheme's pricing policies undervalue American innovation and threaten billions of dollars in lost sales. In March, American medical giants pressed Donald Trump to target Australia with punitive tariffs, labelling the PBS as one of the "egregious and discriminatory" programs that undermines US exports. Labor has already categorically ruled out touching the PBS in any trade negotiations, and a raft of frontbenchers have consistently stressed the Trump administration could not exert any direct influence on the scheme. But the government remains concerned that frustrations over the PBS could see the Trump administration retaliate by hitting Australian pharmaceutical exports. Last year, Australia exported $2.2 billion in pharmaceutical products to the US — about 40 per cent of Australia's pharmaceutical exports — according to the UN's Comtrade database. Ms de Somer said the government could better negotiate with the US, while still protecting the PBS, if it followed recommendations from the review. "If the government committed to implement the reforms of the PBS that they have already identified need to happen, it would go some way to assuage the concerns raised by Donald Trump and the US pharmaceutical industry," she said. "Partly, it is about the time it takes for patients to get access to new medicines, and partly it is about valuing innovation and giving the right value to things that are new and transformative and change people's lives." Former chair of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC), which recommends medicines for the PBS, and chair of the review's implementation advisory group, Andrew Wilson, said the complexities of the system made it difficult to reform. "I don't think there's anybody involved in this process that doesn't want to see this happen faster," Professor Wilson said. "One of the challenges that we've had in the past is not that things haven't changed, but they've changed in a piecemeal fashion. They've changed little bits here and not there and the concern has been the extent to which those changes have actually improved the system, or just made it more complicated." However, Shadow Health Minister Anne Ruston accused the government of dragging its feet in its response to the review. "We're sitting here now nearly 12 months after the review has been delivered to government and we have absolutely nothing more from the government," she said. Mr Butler said the implementation advisory group's final report was due early next year, and would help inform future government decisions on reform. "The Albanese government is continuing to make medicines available to Australian patients faster and cheaper," he said. "We know patients want faster access to cutting-edge medicine and treatments. "That's why our government is working through the recommendations of the HTA review, so Australians can get faster access to the best medicines and therapies, at a cost that patients and the community can afford."
ABC News
an hour ago
- ABC News
Welfare groups join union push for housing tax shake-up ahead of productivity talks
The Australian Council of Social Services has thrown its weight behind calls to wind back property investor tax breaks, setting up a potential housing flashpoint ahead of the government's economic round table next fortnight. It comes days after the Australian Council of Trade Unions urged Labor to tackle negative gearing and capital gains tax reform, but Australia's peak welfare body is also pressing for the billions in extra revenue from the tax changes invested in social housing. In its submission, ACOSS said the 50 per cent capital gains tax discount is "certainly fuelling the housing crisis" and should be halved over five years. Negative gearing, it said, should be phased out entirely over the same period for existing investments. "We are very clear we would phase out the very generous 50 per cent tax discount and get it down to 25 per cent so there'd be some tax reward for property investment but nowhere near as generous," ACOSS chief executive Cassandra Goldie told the ABC. "If you've got capital, and you're thinking, where can I park it to really grow my wealth, you put it into property." ACTU secretary Sally McManus made a similar case on ABC's Insiders at the weekend, saying it was time to "bite the bullet" on property tax reform. While the two peak bodies are not coordinating their campaigns, their aligned positions revive a politically fraught debate Labor abandoned after losing the 2016 and 2019 elections with policies on negative gearing and capital gains tax. ACOSS wants revenue from the tax changes invested in social housing, arguing Australia has "among the highest home prices in the world" and rents that are "all too often unaffordable" with many tenants lacking security of tenure. The share of social housing has "fallen by one third from 6 per cent to 4 per cent over the last 30 years" — a trend it wants reversed to "at least its historic level of 6 per cent of dwellings by 2035, and to 10 per cent by 2045", with First Nations housing "a national priority". Nearly half of all Australian landlords had negatively geared properties in 2023, with the highest earners claiming tens of billions in tax concessions and loopholes. But business groups and some senior government figures privately argue welfare groups and the unions' proposed tax changes will do little to boost new housing supply, warning that investor demand underpins construction and removing incentives risks stalling projects. ACOSS's submission also urges faster action on climate change, calling for new building standards to achieve zero-carbon, climate-resilient homes and tougher rental rules to improve the energy performance of properties. The group said these measures would cut bills for low-income tenants while protecting them from extreme heat and weather. In recent weeks, the government has pared back expectations for the summit amid concern among the business community about a union-led ambush and fears the event could be used to justify tax crackdowns on employers and property investors. Despite the government billing the meeting as a contest of ideas, the ABC understands there will be no joint communique at its conclusion. Instead, Treasurer Jim Chalmers will deliver a wrap-up and nominate a handful of specific changes for implementation. Ahead of this year's election, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese dismissed speculation Labor was planning to scale back the housing tax breaks, after it emerged Mr Chalmers had asked Treasury to model the impact of changes. The treasurer has asked that any proposals must be budget-neutral or budget-positive, but that "all ideas are on the table". The three-day round table will be held at Parliament House from August 19 to 21.
ABC News
an hour ago
- ABC News
Jim Chalmers treads middle path between unions and business on artificial intelligence
It was only last week the prime minister stood in front of three grieving parents to announce YouTube would be included in his social media ban for kids. One father was cradling an urn as he blamed social media for the loss of his daughter. It was a powerful example of a government, with bipartisan support, scrambling to catch up after the horse bolted on a new technology. Another was the News Media Bargaining Code, introduced by the Morrison government to force Google and Facebook to cough up for news content driving clicks on their sites. Leaving aside arguments about the effectiveness of both moves, they represent attempts at retrofitting regulation to put the social media genie at least partly back in the bottle. Which brings us to the current debate around how to regulate — or not — artificial intelligence. If the treasurer's reform roundtable kicking off in two weeks achieves nothing else, it has at least sharpened a long overdue debate about what role government should play in setting the rules of the road for AI. This technology is already upon us. AI is involved whenever we use search engines, digital assistants (think Siri or Alexa), streaming services (think Netflix), and social media. Banks, big tech, and cyber security firms are all racing to roll it out. Even the care sector is quickly developing ways to harness the opportunities. The Brotherhood of St. Laurence, a social justice organisation that provides aged care, disability and other community services, recently ran an eight-week trial of an AI tool. The results were overwhelmingly positive. Staff involved found AI saved them about an hour a day, which could then be spent focusing more on teams and participants. The technology also improved accessibility for staff with language barriers or neurodiversity. "AI has great potential to help community organisations work smarter, reach more people, and tackle long standing barriers to access and equity — if it's done right", Executive Director Travers McLeod told the ABC. "Used responsibly, AI can free up human time in a way that can generate impact for the communities in which we work and support." The benefits are clear, but McLeod also notes the importance of "strong ethical guardrails and a clear framework for lawful and ethical AI use, along with its environment impact, especially in the care economy". "AI must be used as an accelerant of equity and better outcomes for all, not in a way that grows inequity and poverty," he said. This is where the role of the government comes in. Some of these AI "guardrails" already exist in the care sector. Some exist in other sectors too. There's a federal Privacy Act, some states have a Human Rights Act, some industries have professional guidelines. There is, however, no single set of rules for the entire economy governing the "ethical" use of AI or how it can be used to replace human workers. This is the debate now raging ahead of the treasurer's roundtable. At one end of the spectrum sits the ACTU, which wants a national artificial intelligence act, and a new national AI authority to oversee "mandatory enforceable agreements" in every workplace, to ensure staff are consulted before technology is rolled out. At the other end of the spectrum, business groups and the Productivity Commission want as little additional regulation as possible. They argue existing rules are enough and don't want to slow down a technology viewed as crucial for Australia's future success. Treasurer Jim Chalmers is pitching himself as something of a Goldilocks on this. He says he wants to find the right balance "between over-regulating and under-regulating". This "sensible middle path", as Chalmers calls it, charts a course on AI regulation between those who want to "let it rip" and those who want to "pull the doona over the head". This sounds perfectly reasonable, but notably, it still represents a rejection of the union movement's position. Before this roundtable has even begun, the treasurer has said no to one of the ACTU's biggest demands. Indeed, the treasurer is openly siding with the Productivity Commission on this. "The PC's broad directions are largely consistent with the directions that I set out on the weekend." That is, that AI should be treated "as an enabler, not an enemy." This fundamental difference between the union movement and the Labor government over AI could become a bigger point of friction beyond this month's roundtable, given we're only at the start of the AI transformation. AI will increasingly change the way we live and work. There are bound to be jobs lost. Hopefully, new roles will also be created. Where this transformation leads to is difficult to predict, but the path is unlikely to be smooth. Having put its stake in the ground, the ACTU will now be there whenever jobs are lost, demanding much tougher AI rules than the government is willing to accept. The government is trying to strike the right balance between preventing mass redundancies forced by AI, while also preventing Australia falling behind those countries rapidly embracing the technology. Chalmers is optimistic the benefits will ultimately outweigh the risks. He won't want to be a prime minister 10 years from now trying to retrofit regulation after the AI horse has bolted. David Speers is national political lead and host of Insiders, which airs on ABC TV at 9am on Sunday or on iview.
