Latest news with #GeorgeBrandis
Sydney Morning Herald
11-08-2025
- Politics
- Sydney Morning Herald
Australia's recognition of a Palestinian state won't stop the killing
The prime minister has announced Australia will join 147 other countries and recognise a Palestinian state at the UN in September (' Australia to recognise Palestinian state ', August 11). No doubt this will bring fierce criticism from the Israeli government, but how will it serve to end the slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank? I suspect not at all. The Israeli government's stated policy is that there will not be a Palestinian state, and its actions in Gaza and the West Bank continue to diminish the prospect of a two-state solution. Until actions which have a material impact on Israel are introduced, such as trade, financial, cultural and sporting sanctions, many more lives will be lost. Scott McKenzie, Brunswick East (Vic) George Brandis wants us to believe Israel has long pursued a two-state solution (' Recognising Palestine will only reward Hamas, the side with clear genocidal intentions ', August 11). History says otherwise. Jewish-Israeli historian Ilan Pappe argues that from 1948 – when more than 700,000 Palestinians were expelled in the Nakba – to today, the aim has been maximum land with minimum Palestinians. The Oslo Accords did not reverse that, it managed it, granting Israel international cover while the settlement enterprise accelerated in defiance of international law. East Jerusalem was annexed, Gaza blockaded. Every few years the army 'mows the lawn', a chilling euphemism for periodic, overwhelming force designed to weaken Palestinian society, knowing it will grow back. This is not how a state prepares to welcome a neighbour. The claim that recognition 'rewards Hamas' because Hamas has only 'genocidal intent' collapses on contact with facts. In 2017, Hamas issued a new charter accepting a Palestinian state on the 1967 borders. You can dislike Hamas and still acknowledge the record. To say Hamas derailed a viable path to Palestinian sovereignty is to rewrite history. That path never existed, because Israel never intended it to. Already, Australia and 147 other countries have recognised a Palestinian state. Fernanda Trecenti, Fitzroy (Vic) George Brandis's provides something lacking in today's heated debates: historical context. The handshake between Yitzak Rabin and Yasser Arafat in 1993 represented genuine hope for peace through mutual recognition. However, as Brandis notes, achieving such peace requires meeting specific conditions. Any Palestinian state recognition must be earned through concrete steps: immediate release of all hostages, complete disarmament of Hamas and other terrorist organisations, and establishment of democratic institutions enabling free and fair elections. Borders must be negotiated consistent with UN resolutions, Oslo Accords and the Road Map to Peace. Most fundamentally, Palestinian leadership must unequivocally accept Israel's right to exist. Unfortunately, recent actions by Israel's longstanding allies threaten to undermine these essential prerequisites. The looming recognition of a Palestinian state by France, Britain and Canada has emboldened Hamas to resist any ceasefire. Premature recognition by Israel's allies would only reward terrorism, while achieving nothing substantive for peace. John Kempler, Rose Bay George Brandis is blind to the fact that the Netanyahu government, by preventing food supplies, is starving the population of Gaza. Daily media images of starving children in Gaza make it impossible to ignore. He has also brushed over Netanyahu's declaration of intent to occupy Gaza. We all should condemn the actions of Hamas on October 7, but Western governments that continue to supply weapons should also use action, not mere words, to force Israel to stop the killings. Germany seems to be an outlier in this regard by declaring its intention to suspend the supply of weapons to Israel. If other countries would follow its example, perhaps the killings will end. Bipin Johri, Epping Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke is right: Palestinian statehood must now be realised (' Gaza ceasefire hopes revived ', August 11). Decisive action is needed now, not more platitudes. The stakes are too high not to act. Hamas's atrocities on October 7 must be condemned without qualification. The hostages must be released immediately. Arab nations have rightly denounced Hamas, which must have no role in Palestine's future. But Israel, as a powerful democracy, must be held to a higher standard, especially when its current leadership seeks to erode the very democratic principles it claims to defend. Benjamin Netanyahu and his extremist cohorts are utter vandals. The human cost, borne primarily by Palestinians, is intolerable. As Penny Wong has warned, soon there may be no Palestine left to recognise if the world fails to act. The tradition of Jewish humanist ethics, from Buber to Benjamin to Magnes, rejects both denial and dehumanisation. Those who still seek common humanity stand opposed to extremists on both sides who exploit this moment to spread hatred. History leaves no ambiguity: this outrage must be brought to an end. Simon Tedeschi, Newtown George Brandis mocks protesters for chanting 'from the river to the sea', but does he know the expression has long been an Israeli mantra? The intentions of Israel have long been to annex the territory from the river to the sea, with systematic appropriation of portions of the West Bank and expulsion of the locals. Israel may say Palestine has the right to exist, but its actions speak otherwise. Ross Devine, Mallabula It appears Brandis and Benjamin Netanyahu are of one mind when it comes to Australia's recognition of Palestine. However, the clue is in the name. The goal is to recognise the nation of Palestine, not the nation of Hamas. The elimination of terror is best achieved by realising the legitimate rights to peace, security and prosperity of the Palestinian people. Instead, Israel has oppressed its neighbours and failed to protect its own people, despite their superior military and intelligence resources. Recognition may only be symbolic, but symbols have the power to focus attention and rally support. Philip Cooney, Wentworth Falls Brandis seems content to quibble about the meaning of the word 'genocide', but the fact remains that tens of thousands of innocent Gazans have lost their lives since October 7, 2023. As for his outrage about protesters 'advocating ethnic cleansing' by chanting 'from the river to the sea', he conveniently disregards the eviction of Palestinians by Israel from their homes in the West Bank. It's also telling that he makes no mention of Netanyahu's early support for Hamas over the Palestinian Authority. George Watkins, Blaxland There have been Middle East deals in the past that could have led to a lasting two-state solution, the last being the Oslo Accords, which fell apart because right-wing Israelis shot PM Yitzhak Rabin, leading to the last 30 years of Israel governments making sure a two-state solution would never happen, including supporting Hamas as a foil to the PLA so they could say we can't negotiate with terrorists. Brenton McGeachie, Hackett (ACT) Many Israelis should acknowledge that Netanyahu has generated so much hate from not only every Palestinian but also millions of people from all around the world. He now has an additional job description: Chief Hamas Recruitment Officer. Neil Mclaren, Jamberoo By exercising his 'right to be a bigot', George Brandis fails to speak the truth. The starving and killing of non-combatants can never be justified, legally or morally. Mark Porter, New Lambton Selective statistics Shadow home affairs minister Andrew Hastie implies that Australia should dump net zero by 2050 by asking '... how much does Australia have a role in changing the climate when we produce 1.1 per cent of the world's emissions?' (' Right-wing group targets 'weakling' Liberals, as Hastie pushes Ley to dump net zero', August 11). What Hastie conveniently ignores with this selective statistic is that 36 per cent of global emissions come from countries whose individual share is less than 2 per cent. These individual small contributors, such as Australia, collectively have a huge impact and must act in unison to lower global emissions. The Coalition is in real trouble when senior shadow ministers are unable to come to terms with reality. John Berry, Cammeray Can we please drive a stake through the heart of the 'we're only 1.1 per cent of the world's carbon emissions' argument? Andrew Hastie is being disingenuous. Would he be happy if his neighbour used the same argument and tipped his garbage in the local bushland, or disconnected his sewerage or disconnected his motor vehicle pollution controls, all because 'it's only 1.1 per cent'? Australia is one of the richest countries in the world and it would be uncharitable, unneighbourly and downright immoral for it to essentially withdraw from the world's effort to curb global warming. And the current campaign will only destabilise our political system for no one's benefit, except un-Australian groups like Advance. Tony Mitchell, Hillsdale In the government's second term, Sean Kelly is right to focus on the question: 'Are emissions being cut fast enough?' (' 100 days in, how does Albanese measure up?' August 11). The answer is a resounding 'no'. Australian Labor has continued to rely on the Howard government's Kyoto con of using land use changes when quoting emissions reduction. If the government is genuine about emissions reduction in its second term, it will exclude land use when quoting figures, and stop approving new coal and gas projects. Setting a science-based 2035 emissions target is also needed. But far stronger efforts will be required to achieve it. Ray Peck, Hawthorn (Vic) Can AI help productivity? Ask it Should AI be used to increase productivity at the expense of jobs (' Split in Albanese's caucus as government moves to kill AI laws', August 11)? Naturally, I asked AI: 'If AI is used to increase productivity and it costs jobs, will productivity be fulfilling its purpose, which is meant to benefit people?' This is an extract of what it said: 'If AI causes widespread unemployment, income inequality could worsen. People who lose their jobs may not have the skills for the new roles created, leading to long-term hardship. In this scenario, productivity is not fulfilling its purpose for a large segment of the population. The economy might be more efficient, but the human cost would be high, and the benefits would not be widely shared.' For the full answer, try it out. Stephen Jacobs, North Sydney As a former CSIRO scientist, it is very pleasing for me to see the excellent work done by CSIRO receiving some publicity, as many of its achievements fly under the radar (' CSIRO devises way to break AI deepfake links ', August 11). It should be understood that such achievements are often the consequence of years of work and experience by dedicated teams, and success cannot occur without long-term financial commitment. However, this year CSIRO is expected to shed 400 employees due to government cutbacks and some research programs will be jeopardised. The Labor government may dream about this being a clever country, but it should be understood that cleverness needs nurturing – through significant investment. Geoff Harding, Chatswood Now that the CSIRO appears to have developed an algorithm that can block AI being used to create deepfakes, isn't it time the government prioritised science and development research by increasing CSIRO funding again? Gina Hay, Bayview I am surprised that in the commentary on regulating AI to preserve jobs that the approach previously followed when technology has reduced required working hours has not been mentioned – that is to simply reduce the working week. Throughout the industrial revolution, as automation improved, the working week was reduced. Over the years, the working week has been reduced from 60 hours (1847 in England), 48 hours (1857, Australia), 44 hours (1927, Australia), 40 hours (1948, Australia), and since 1981, 38 hours. We should enjoy the benefits of AI by taking more leisure time. Pierre Mars, Vaucluse Tax vendors, agents Used car salesmen are passing the wooden spoon to real estate agents for the 2025 season. Reader Roger Campbell's suggestion to tax profits above the guide and reserve at 50 per cent has appeal, but not to our lawmakers (Letters, August 11). To see justice done though, the 50 per cent should be levied jointly against the vendor and their agent. Correspondent Michael McFadyen's suggestion to legally require the publication of the reserve price is worth considering. It's actually hard to argue against. It's fair and ensures transparency, and it's easy to implement and enforce. Let's give it a go. Howard Charles, Glebe As a former (commercial) real estate agent, I can say your readers Geoff Lindsay and Michael McFadyen are on the money. If it's an auction sale, the vendor must state the reserve prior to any open house inspections. The figure also needs to be on the sales agreement with the real estate agent and on the brochure. Also, at auction, the agent should be banned from speaking to any purchasers during the 'live' auction process, as we would all know the reserve. The selling agent and the vendor should go 50/50 on any pest and building inspection reports and also strata minutes, to eliminate any shenanigans. Tim Maunsell, Sydney Considering the shenanigans of real estate agents, why don't we simply dispense with them and sell our homes ourselves? For a start, list it in a dedicated 'Houses for Sale' section in a newspaper, Facebook, or what you will, and negotiate from there. All you need is the help and advice of a solicitor. Ted Richards, Batemans Bay There's a simple solution to ascertaining the true value of a home you may wish to purchase. When my partner and I were in the market for a new home, we spent six months every Saturday going to on-site auctions of the type of place we were interested in. There, you have a good opportunity to inspect the place and see what it actually is sold for. After doing that, we developed a very good knowledge of market value, without any cost except a few hours on a weekend. Then, with that knowledge, the place that suited us arrived at the right price for our budget, and voilà, we had a new home. Gerard Baz, Kensington Deliver a pollution cut The Albanese government is now in its second term of office and it's time to take stock, as your writer Sean Kelly points out (' 100 days in, how does Albanese measure up?' August 11). The PM has repeatedly identified 2025 as a 'year of delivery' on Labor's promises. So what of climate change? Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen is making a valiant effort to speed up the renewables roll-out. Unfortunately, this is not enough. The government is soon to set our national climate target for 2035. The Climate Change Authority recommends cutting pollution by 75 per cent below 2005 levels to protect our communities from the worst effects of climate change. But any plan to do so must take our exports into account. Australia's coal and gas exports make us one of the world's top polluters. I sincerely hope the government comes up with a broad, decisive plan to reduce pollution. Anne O'Hara, Wanniassa (ACT) US has form on peace deals US President Donald Trump will soon chat with Russian President Vladimir Putin (' Trump and Putin to meet for talks to end Ukraine war ', August 11). The fate of Ukraine will undoubtedly be on the agenda. Ukraine's President Volodomyr Zelensky should prepare himself for the possibility of disappointment. The Americans have form. Fifty years ago, they negotiated a peace plan with North Vietnam and then pressured the South Vietnamese to accept it, with assurances that America would support it in the event of aggression from the North. Those assurances were not worth much, as it turned out, and the rest is history. Joe Weller, Mittagong
Epoch Times
28-05-2025
- Politics
- Epoch Times
After the Fall: Can the Liberals Rebuild From the Ashes?
Less than a month after recording its worst federal election result in history, the Liberal Party finds itself fractured and faced with the challenge of rebuilding trust and direction. From alienating key demographics to factional infighting, the Liberals—once Australia's natural party of government—are reckoning with a defeat many say was years in the making. Former attorney-general George Brandis delivered one of the sharpest rebukes, arguing the party had systematically alienated large swathes of the electorate—women, public servants, multicultural communities, and inner-city voters. 'It was almost as if we were running out of new people to offend,' he told ABC's Four Corners. Brandis said those blaming the historic loss on campaign missteps are missing the deeper rot within the party's image and ideological direction. Modernise Or Return To Roots? The result has triggered a battle for the soul of the party. One camp believes the Liberals have drifted too far from their economic and philosophical roots, diluting their message and confusing voters. Another, led by new party leader Sussan Ley, believes the path forward lies in modernisation and occupying 'the sensible centre.' Related Stories 5/23/2025 5/21/2025 'The answer is not to move to the centre, but to move forward as one united team … continuing to bring together classical Liberals and conservatives in our great party together with the Nationals,' said Senator Sarah Henderson, rejecting the idea that the party had veered too far right. But forging unity remains easier said than done. Ley's own leadership is on shaky ground after she won the top job by just four votes over Shadow Treasurer Angus Taylor. The Coalition's internal divisions erupted almost immediately after the loss, and nowhere are they clearer than on climate and energy policy. MP Andrew Hastie made his position clear: abandon net-zero. 'I think the question of net zero, that's a straitjacket that I'm already getting out of,' he told Four Corners, echoing a growing view among the party's right flank. O'Brien, formerly the Coalition's nuclear energy spokesperson, sidestepped the net-zero question altogether. Instead, he pivoted to cost-of-living concerns. 'The real question is should Australian families and businesses be paying more for their electricity?' But moderates are against backpedalling. Senator Maria Kovacic warned that rejecting net-zero targets would alienate the next generation of voters. 'Most young Australians believe that climate change is real ... we have to deliver energy policies that ensure that we reach our net zero targets and that we deliver stable power ... as cheap as possible.' Finding Their Way Back With the dust settling, attention is turning to the road ahead. Some believe only a complete overhaul will save the party. 'They have lost any interest in balancing the budget, reducing taxes, being pro-free enterprise,' said former Liberal MP John Ruddick, who now backs more populist reforms with the Libertarian Party. He advocates U.S.-style primaries to fix what he sees as a 'wrong candidate selection model,' and believes the party's failure lies in trying to mimic Labor. 'Donald Trump has shown us that the only way to push the left back … is to be on the front foot. Peter Dutton and Sussan Ley think, 'Oh well, we can win by being Labor-lite,'' he told The Epoch Times. Others offer alternative views. Senator Kovacic believes reconnecting with core Liberal economic values may offer the clearest way forward. 'If we focused on our economic credentials … then I think we would've connected with people.'
The Guardian
26-05-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
Australia news live: Liberals rue ‘fairy floss politics' and policy black hole under Dutton; looting warning follows floods
Update: Date: 2025-05-26T20:38:08.000Z Title: Culture war cost us seats, senior Liberals tell Four Corners Content: Current and former Liberal party MPs and senators have said the party's focus on culture war has seen their inner-city constituencies abandon them and contributed to their election loss in what one called 'fairy floss politics'. Speaking to ABC's Four Corners on Monday night, former NSW Liberal president Jason Falinski, former senator George Brandis and NSW senator Maria Kovacic criticised their party's focus on small, hard-right constituencies and culture wars. The party alienated women, especially those who wanted to work from home, offended public servants, multicultural communities, people in the inner cities, students and 'other minority groups as well', Brandis said: It was almost as if we were running out of new people to offend. People who felt the party needed to lean harder into the culture wars were 'nuts', Brandis said: The people you have to persuade are the people who didn't vote for you last time but are open to persuasion. And those people live in the centre ground of Australian politics. And if you spend your time drinking your own political bathwater and only living in an echo chamber of far-rightwing opinion, you're never going to get them. Falinski said that 'fairy floss politics' – that is, 'high-calorie, low-nutrition politics' such as copying Donald Trump's Department of Government Efficiency, or Doge, concept – was 'not healthy for us'. Kovacic said: I don't think that everyday Australians are particularly interested in culture wars. People have abandoned us in the cities because our messaging doesn't resonate with them, and they haven't gone to the right. They voted for Labor and the teals because what we're selling them isn't aligned with them. Update: Date: 2025-05-26T20:36:49.000Z Title: Coalition wanted to erase Aboriginal people from national memory: Dodson Content: Pat Dodson has also decried what he called the 'new assimilation' policies pushed by the Coalition during the election campaign, saying it is another way of trying to erase Aboriginal people from national memory. Speaking to 7.30 on Monday night, Dodson said: If you looked at what they were talking about in the opposition at the last election, getting rid of land councils, revising a whole range of symbolism, throw out the welcome to country, get rid of the flags, rescind the ambassador. Anything that indicates the presence of Aboriginal people would have gone. That's what the new assimilation's about, is completing the obliteration of Aboriginal people from the landscape. Cultural heritage is another very important aspect of that. The more you smash and destroy the cultural heritage of Aboriginal people, the greater it is to say that there is a substantive argument to say that they had a substantive presence here, because there's no evidence – you've blown it up. Update: Date: 2025-05-26T20:30:55.000Z Title: Labor should return to 'treaty-making process', Pat Dodson says Content: Yaruwu elder and former Labor senator Pat Dodson has urged the Albanese government to 'go back to the treaty-making process' in order to continue the project of reconciliation with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, arguing the 'resounding victory' of Labor at the election gave them a new opportunity. Speaking to ABC's 7.30 on Monday night, Dodson said he was 'very confident' Albanese could lead that process, but it would require going back to the Uluru statement from the heart. Dodson said: That doesn't mean they have to go down the constitutional path for a voice. But it does mean that they've got to honour the two aspects of the Makarrata commission. That wasn't voted on by the people. That wasn't part of the provision that we voted on, to vote down. So they have to go back to the treaty-making process and the truth-telling process. And they can do that, because it doesn't require constitutional referendum. That can be done by way of legislation. Truth-telling needed to be a two-way street, Dodson said, and it needed to result in a 'national narrative' that was not simply 'Captain Cook came here and no one was here'. Dodson continued: I think that the government's come back with a resounding victory. The horror that they anticipated [of electoral defeat] passed by. They've now got the confidence of the Australian people. The Australian people want to see unity. They don't want to see hatred. And they want to live with a national sense of Australian pride. The time has come. We can't keep kicking it down the road, and even the prime minister was saying during the referendum – if not now, when? So, OK, the referendum went up and it went down. That doesn't mean that that is the end of reconciliation. Reconciliation is about the substantive issues. Update: Date: 2025-05-26T20:30:55.000Z Title: Welcome Content: Good morning and welcome to our live news blog. I'm Martin Farrer with the top overnight stories and then it'll be Luca Ittimani with the main action. Current and former Liberal party MPs and senators have said the party's focus on culture war and a failure to properly develop and present policies cost the party the election. Speaking on Four Corner last night, former NSW Liberal president Jason Falinski said 'high-calorie, low-nutrition politics' – so-called 'fairy floss politics' – had proved costly. More details coming up. We have an exclusive story this morning from the veteran-led organisation on the frontline of disaster recovery calling for federal government support to help establish a 10,000-strong volunteer army. It comes as police are pouring resources into flood-ravaged towns in NSW to prevent a breakdown in law and order after two men were arrested for alleged looting. More coming up. In another exclusive, one of the architects of the Indigenous voice to parliament, Megan Davis, who says Aboriginal Australians increasingly feel the government is not listening to their views on laws and policy design, warns against closed-shop public consultations in the wake of the referendum defeat.
