November 29, 2024
Opening statement from Vicki Thomson, Chief Executive, The Group of Eight
The rise of antisemitism globally and in Australia since 7 October 2023 has been shocking.
The fault lines in our social cohesion have been exposed – be it in our communities, in our schools, here in Parliament House and on our university campuses – the focus of this Committee inquiry.
The rise in antisemitism in Australia is part of a broader breakdown in social cohesion which is at an all-time low. Last week the Scanlon Foundation released the 2024 Mapping Social Cohesion report – our social cohesion index at 78 (equal with 2023) is the lowest since the survey began in 2007.
We’ve also had warnings from our security agencies around the breakdown in social cohesion.
Director-General of ASIO Mike Burgess has said ‘more Australians are being radicalised more quickly’, ‘more people thinking violence is permissible’ and ‘there is more temperature in our security environment and inappropriate behaviour that is being normalised’.
That our universities have not been immune to the rise in antisemitism and breakdown in social cohesion should not be surprising – we have half a million people coming and going from our universities each and every day – sadly this phenomenon predates 7 October – but it has been a jolting wakeup call – for all of us.
Our universities must be places where people can agree or disagree well, where everyone feels safe and welcome while remaining places where the freedom of speech and academic freedom are realised. But we cannot and must not tolerate antisemitic behaviour.
Whilst our universities did have long standing policies and procedures in place to address racism on campus and provide support for students, staff and academics, clearly they weren’t enough during periods of heightened tensions.
We are here because a previous Inquiry by the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee found that university responses to incidents of antisemitism were inadequate.
We have recognised the need to better understand, be better equipped, and take necessary action in both preventing and responding to antisemitism on campus.
Our priority has been and will always be the safety and wellbeing of our students and staff.
As a collective, the Group of Eight has taken a range of actions to address antisemitism and the breakdown of social cohesion and we will continue to do so.
Actions taken by Go8 Universities thus far include:
- Development and commitment to clear principles regarding demonstrations on campus;
- undertaken revisions to their regulations with regards to prohibiting encampments;
- ensured clear communications with University communities regarding expectations of staff and student conduct;
- where necessary revised student complaints procedures;
- sought to improve dialogue with student groups;
- shared best practice;
- increased engagement with community stakeholders;
- have all worked diligently with the Special Envoy.
The Go8 welcomed the appointment of the Special Envoy Jillian Segal and has worked closely with her office on two major pieces of work:
- The development of a shared definition of antisemitism as it relates to the university sector, and
- The development of antisemitism training packages for university leaders and front-line staff involved in student conduct and complaints and student safety and wellbeing.
Our staff and students need to not only know it when they see it, but to also have a reference point by way of a definition.
To this end, the Go8 formed two working groups of experts from across our membership -including Jewish academics and experts in free speech and hate speech.
We’ve been pleased to work closely with the Special Envoy and her office over the last few months to develop a working definition of antisemitism and this engagement has involved senior university leaders up to Vice Chancellor level.
Only yesterday the Special Envoy met with the Go8 to further progress this important work and I am very pleased to say we are in close agreement on the working definition and are both confident we will be able to finalise in the near future.
This is a significant achievement. To have worked so effectively with the Special Envoy and her office on a working definition that we are all confident can soon be finalised is an achievement of which Australia can be proud.
The working definition of antisemitism draws from a range of existing definitions and incorporates the latest scholarship investigating the most effective ways to define and combat antisemitism.
It draws on the working definition developed by the International Holocaust Remembrance Authority (IHRA) definition, noting that some universities have adopted it, as well as others formulated by the Van Leer Institute in Jerusalem and by the Nexus Project in the United States.
We have also drawn on recommendations of Antisemitism Taskforces at Columbia University, Stanford University, Harvard University, and New York University.
We are committed to continual improvement and are absolutely intent on working with the Special Envoy to make sure we get this right.
The second important piece is training.
It was clear from both evidence provided to the previous inquiry as well as directly to the Envoy that there were serious and legitimate concerns about the ability of University leaders as well as frontline university staff being able to recognise and respond.
We have to do better.
Under the leadership of Associate Professor David Slucki and the Australian Centre for Jewish Civilisation at Monash University training packages targeting, in the first instance senior leadership (Vice Chancellor, DVC and Provost levels) will be piloted next week. It will then be made available to all universities.
The second tranche of training will be aimed at frontline university staff working in student-facing roles (e.g, security, student services, residential services, etc) and will take place in February 2025, ahead of the commencement of first semester. That training will be conducted face-to-face.
The modules will focus on the history of Jews and antisemitism, how antisemitism manifests in the contemporary impact, and its impacts on Jewish communities. The training includes case studies gathered from across the Group of Eight that are tailored for various audiences – and working with leaders and staff on how best to implement measures to prevent and respond to antisemitism.
And our universities have all taken their own actions, guided by their individual circumstances. There are many examples I can point to but in the interests of time and recognising that individual Vice Chancellors appearing before the Committee will speak to this shortly – I can elaborate during the question and answer session. This will also be covered in our written submission to the Committee.
For Go8 universities and I can speak for the whole sector when I say – providing a safe place for all students, staff and academics on campus exercises the minds of university leaders every day – but addressing antisemitism is a shared enterprise and shared responsibility.
We need to work together – universities, governments and their agencies such as TEQSA and the National Student Ombudsman – all have an important role to play as we actively seek to eliminate antisemitism and all forms of racism.
**Check against delivery
