The Hon. SHAOQUETT MOSELMANE (22:19): In my final adjournment speech, I take great pride in speaking on justice for the Palestinian people. I am honoured that I have been in a small way a part of NSW Labor and national Labor conferences that have over the years called on Labor in government to recognise the State of Palestine. The most recent unanimous reaffirmation of Labor's support was at the 2021 national conference, which enshrined it in the party's policy platform. The motion called for a Federal Labor Government to recognise Palestine as a State and to support United Nations Security Council Resolution 1397, which was adopted in 2002.

I look forward to a further reaffirmation of that position passing at our upcoming NSW Labor conference next month and to the Albanese Labor Government to make good on Labor's promise to the Arab Australian community sooner rather than later. Since the partition of Palestine in 1948, many in Labor have supported the recognition of Palestine established on the principle of a permanent two-State solution based on the 1967 borders as the realisation of the inalienable right of the Palestinian people. Australia's 1948 historic position was put by then foreign Minister Dr H. V. Evatt, as chairman of the UN Special Committee on Palestine, who authorised the partition of Palestine into two States. Upon the basis of that decision, the State of Israel was created.

Whitlam's 1972 policy on Palestine was even‑handed. It built upon Dr Evatt's 1948 two-State solution. This was followed by the Hawke Government's 1983 acknowledgement of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination. Soon after was the Keating Government's continued support for the basic principle of a two-State solution, a position re-endorsed by the Rudd and Gillard Labor governments. However, it was with the Rudd and Gillard governments that Labor in government began to take that extra step in balancing Labor's positive position vis-a-vis Palestine, specifically under the Carr foreign ministry. In the campaign for recognition for Palestine, Prime Minister Rudd told the ABC RadioPM program:

… the time has come for Australia to join countries like Sweden and the Holy See in formally recognising the Palestinian State. It is time for Australia to draw a line in the sand on this matter, as 137 States already have.

The late former Prime Minister Bob Hawke also joined Kevin Rudd, Gareth Evans and Bob Carr in calling on Australia to recognise Palestine as a State. In a 2017Financial Review opinion piece, Hawke called on the Australian Government to recognise the State of Palestine:

Australia was there at the very beginning. The least we can do now, in these most challenging of times, is to do what 137 other nations have already done—grant diplomatic recognition to the State of Palestine.

This significant call to recognise Palestine was echoed in a landmark speech by the Hon. Bob Carr on 30 July 2017 at the NSW Labor State conference, by driving home the point that it is time to recognise Palestine. Australia must act now, before Israel gobbles up the remaining Palestinian territories. It may be too late, given the rate of settlements taking place on Palestinian land.

I am proud to be a member of a party that supports peace and justice for the Palestinian people. The recognition of a Palestinian State is also a rebuke to those who continue to cover up Israel's apartheid practices, its human rights abuses, its ongoing illegal occupation of Palestinian land, its ongoing hostilities and the subjugation of the Palestinian people, the illegal settlements as well as the blockade of the Gaza Strip, the collective punishment, the ever-deepening humanitarian crises and the daily suffering of the Palestinian people. I am proud to have been part of this journey in support of justice for the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, an indigenous people who have never ceded rights to their land. No matter the oppression, no matter the subjugation, no matter the occupation, no matter the dehumanisation or the attempted eradication of Palestinian culture and rights, justice will prevail and Palestine will be once again.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT (The Hon. Wes Fang): The question is that this House do now adjourn.

Motion agreed to.

The House adjourned at 22:23 until Tuesday 11 October 2022 at 14:30.

 Australians have resoundingly rejected Morrison’s conservative forces and elected a caring Albanese Labor government. It’s now time to vote out a tired, incompetent Perrottet government and elect a community oriented Labor government in NSW.

To continue to strengthen Labor’s multicultural community links, I need your support to help in my ALP preselection for the March 2023 state election.

The Hon. Shaoquett Moslemane brief contribution on the NSW government’s Covid -19 harshest treatment of Western Sydney.  The people of South West and West of sydney, had the hardest lockdown throughout Australia at any time during the pandemic.

…..

Monday was truly Freedom day for the people of South West and Western Sydney. It is a day of relief. The Pandemic was not just a health crisis but for the people of Western Sydney it was an economic crisis and a political crisis as they suffered the full brunt of an ignorant NSW government and arrogant federal government.  The Target was Western Sydney. Police compliance operations were stepped up and the noose around Western Sydney tightened.

 The NSW Government imposition of curfews on Western Sydney LGAs they called areas of concern was another blow to communities brought down to their knees pleading for assistance as they struggled to pay their mortgage, pay rent and bills or put food on the table.

 People in Western Sydney began to wonder why the ill treatment. Why were people in Eastern Sydney in their thousands flocking to the beaches with little regard for masks or social distancing free to enjoy the fresh air. This, while South West and Western Sydney, where there are no beaches, few pools, relatively few parks were the red danger zones,?

Why the difference in policy when the Delta disaster originated in Bondi and spread from Bondi, the Sydney’s East, Yet Bondi has never been an LGA of concern.

 Why did Health Minister Brad Hazzard have no issue with beachgoer’s masklessness, not interested in fining them or discovering their vaccination status, while the people of Western Sydney suffer the sweltering heat, have their pools and Aquatic Centre closed. People rightly asked Why?

 The lack of any curfew in the East intensified perceived partiality and that sense of injustice.

 The Premier herself admitted the use of curfews did not have much of an impact on stopping the spread of COVID. So Why did the government persist with it?

 What the NSW government needed to provide was extra financial support for individuals and businesses as many suffered losses in trade of up to 70 per cent.

 West and South West Sydney have borne the brunt of restrictions - movement permits, curfews, heightened enforcement measures, forced business closures and the overwhelming number of COVID cases,” Yet minimal support was provided.

 Shadow Treasurer Daniel Mookhey said unless there is urgent support, there is a real risk of long term negative impacts, and turning short term, temporary pain, into long term economic devastation.

 This is why the opposition decided held a virtual roundtable with West and South West Sydney business and community leaders to discuss and hear first hand from those that mattered, what is needed to deliver meaningful economic recovery that will help people and business get back on their feet once lockdown and restrictions are lifted.

 Deputy Liberal Leader, Stuart Ayres MP, admitted that his Government’s lockdown singled out and disproportionately impacted Western Sydney.

 Well, we knew this and as our shadow Minister for Western Sydney, Greg Warren MP said: “The people of Western Sydney won’t forget how this Government treated them during this lockdown”.

The Hon. SHAOQUETT MOSELMANE (22:28):

Australia has a devastatingly violent and deadly history when it comes to the treatment of our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Since 1788 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have been subject to incomprehensible atrocities, and have had their culture and their way of life almost eliminated. From the bloody onslaught at the time of British invasion right through to the inequality that continues to permeate society, First Nations people continue to be let down by our governments. Reconciliation Week 2021 offers an opportunity to pause and consider this harrowing past. In the past few decades there have been major historical milestones in Australia's journey to reconciliation. The 1967 Referendum saw 90.77 per cent of Australians vote "yes" when asked whether the Australian Government should be able to legislate on behalf of First Nations people and whether they should be included in the census. The historic Mabo decision that ruled that Australian land was not terra nullius at the time of colonisation led to the establishment of the Native Title Act in 1993.

In 2008 the then Prime Minister Kevin Rudd gave the Apology speech. Despite these advancements, Indigenous Australians continue to be over-represented in statistics of incarceration, health issues, low education and a plethora of other categories. This year, in 2021, the theme of reconciliation week is "More than a word. Reconciliation takes action." So what does active reconciliation look like? Karen Mundine, the CEO of Reconciliation Australia, stated:

Reconciliation isn't a single moment or place in time. It's lots of small, consistent steps, some big strides, and sometimes unfortunate backwards steps ...

This sentiment is reflected in the strategic direction of Reconciliation Australia. It has five pillars of reconciliation: race relations, equality and equity, institutional integrity, unity and, finally, historical acceptance. Each of these pillars aligns with a desired aim and action plan for one day achieving a reconciled nation. At the forefront of all of these is the need to amplify and prioritise First Nations voices in guiding these endeavours.

One way of achieving this is through the establishment of a treaty—a treaty that formalises the expectations of a relationship. Australia is the only Commonwealth nation to not have a treaty with its Indigenous population. It is widely believed that a treaty in Australia would address issues of sovereignty, land rights, shared power, the need for a guaranteed voice in government, recognition, ownership, reform and entitlements. Not only would the establishment of a treaty in Australia have these tangible impacts, which would contribute toward reconciliation; it would also be a symbolic gesture of the intent to change. Bob Hawke is fondly remembered by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people for his attempts to establish a treaty, which were ultimately hindered by resistance. Nevertheless, theBarunga Statement served as an important reminder that there was the potential for change in the appropriate political landscape.

More recently, in 2017, theUluru Statement from the Heart saw Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people from across Australia come together in a historical moment of unification. The statement was a powerful call to action from the First Nations people to the Australian Government and population. The concluding statement in the document is:

In 1967 we were counted, in 2017 we seek to be heard. We leave base camp and start our trek across this vast country. We invite you to walk with us in a movement of the Australian people for a better future.

The main objective of the statement was to enact constitutional change that enshrined First Nations voices into Parliament. This action would ensure that First Nations people were involved in policymaking decisions that affected them. What theUluru Statement from the Heart highlighted was that the journey of reconciliation would be impossible if the voices of Australia's First Nations people are not included. To achieve a reconciled Australia, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people will need to be given the platform, opportunity and legitimacy to guide and advise conversations about their experiences in this nation. The Victorian Government has paved the way through the recent adoption of the Advancing the Treaty Process with Aboriginal Victorians Bill 2018. It established the necessary framework for beginning the treaty-making process. If Victoria, South Australia and Northern Territory can start the process, why can't we?

 The Hon. SHAOQUETT MOSELMANE (00:15): The Morrison Government's decision to block Australians returning from India is appalling. It is an outrageous dereliction of duty to one's citizens. No self‑respecting government would ditch its own citizens in the manner in which the Morrison Government has. It is a low act of cruelty and in breach of all civilised standards and international norms. I was not surprised to hear of this abominable, cruel decision taken by the Morrison Government. I remember the debate around bringing home Australians from China. The discussion rotated around dumping them hundreds of kilometres away from mainland Australia in detention centres on Christmas Island. The Federal Government is insulting to all Australians. Internationally, our name is mud.

Australians are a humane people. We care about others and we value all our citizens as Australians deserving protection. As Emeritus Professor of Medicine at UNSW, John Dwyer, argues in his article published on thePearls and Irritations platform, we have "a moral responsibility to get Australians home". About 9,000 Australians are in India, including 650 who are listed as "vulnerable". They need our help. We have a duty of care to them as Australians, as we have to all Australians in Australia and abroad. We all appreciate the need to tread carefully to ensure that all measures are taken to prevent the spread of a more aggressive strain of coronavirus taking foothold in Australia and prevent a third wave. We all agree on this. However, we must make decisions to ensure that the lives of all Australians are equally worthy of saving.

Instead of reaching out to Australians in India, the Morrison Government has threatened them with a $66,600 fine or a five‑year jail term if they attempt to enter Australia from India. Whilst the ban on travel from India is temporary and is due to expire on 15 May, the Government could decide to extend it. The truth is that no such measure had ever been applied by the Government to any other international COVID-19 hotspot. Former Race Discrimination Commissioner Tim Soutphommasane toldSBS News there has been "an inconsistency" with how the Federal Government has treated arrivals from different countries during the pandemic. He stated:

When COVID-19 was raging last year in the United States, the UK and in countries across Europe, we didn't see a ban on arrivals of people from Europe, let alone criminal penalties being threatened to Australian citizens seeking to return home.

The Australian Human Rights Commission, an independent government organisation, said officials must publicly justify the new policy and show it is not discriminatory. Justine Nolan, a law professor and the director of the Australian Human Rights Institute at UNSW, stated:

They have taken it to the extreme—not only closing the door, but adding the potential fines and jail …

I think we're not acting consistently with our international human rights obligations.

Australian citizen Mandeep Sharma is currently stuck in the Indian city of Kapurthala. He left Australia on 2 April to bury his father. Mr Sharma's return flight to Australia, scheduled for 7 May, was cancelled after the ban on flights from India was announced earlier in the week. He says the additional criminalisation measures are insulting. He toldSBS News:

In our hour of need, [the Australian government] has abandoned and betrayed us …

The Council of Indian Australians said there is a feeling in the Indian-Australian community that they have been unfairly targeted. The council's public officer Mohit Kumar stated:

It's a kick in the guts. It's un-Australian and it's unacceptable.

Federation of Indian Associations of NSW president, Yadu Singh, said some members of the diaspora have said they hoped the announcement was not part of any "racist dog whistling".

Australian barrister, human rights and refugee advocate Julian Burnside said he was "horrified" by the Government's move to ban Australian arrivals from India, while renowned human rights lawyer Geoffrey Robertson, QC, said the ban on Australians returning from India because of COVID-19 is unconstitutional and made under "dictatorial power", not approved by Parliament and undermined rule of law. Former test cricket opener Michael Slater, who is attempting to return home from India, accused Prime Minister Morrison of having blood on his hands over the controversial travel ban. He tweeted:

If our government cared for the safety of Aussies they would allow us to get home. It's a disgrace!

Blood on your hands PM. How dare you treat us like this.

 The Hon. SHAOQUETT MOSELMANE (15:03:08): Yesterday the President read to the House a letter from the Australian Federal Police [AFP] concerning their investigation that has involved the execution of search warrants on my home and Parliament House office. Today I have some important information about those matters that I believe will be of interest to the House and to all honourable members. I take this opportunity to thank the Hon. Mark Latham for giving me his timeslot for this private member's statement. From the moment that the search was undertaken at my home, I was informed by numerous Federal agents of the Australian Federal Police that I was not a suspect or in any way a person of interest with respect to the commission of any crime whatsoever.

My legal representative who attended the search that morning from 7.00 a.m. until 1.00 a.m. the next day was assured by several of the Federal agents in attendance that I was not a suspect. Recently the Australian Federal Police have released copies of recordings of conversations that were undertaken when the searches were executed at my home and my parliamentary office. In one of the transcripts of a conversation between me and the Australian Federal agent, the following appears:

So, in relation to the third condition, the allegations—it's just stepped out. So, these are—as I said to you before, these aren't allegations directed at you as a suspect, okay? They are allegations that are relevant to the investigation. However, information known to the investigation would suggest that there is potentially information at this location relevant to the investigation, and relevant to these allegations. So the allegations, which again are not directed at you, relate to this particular provision of the Criminal Code. And I appreciate you may not be familiar with that, in particular.

There further appears the following comments from the Federal agent:

That's essentially the basic nature of the investigation, but … as I have reiterated to you a number of times, you are not considered a suspect in relation to this investigation.

There it is in black and white. At no time was I ever the subject of a warrant that asserts that I was an offender or a person of interest with respect to the commission of any crime whatsoever. The letter from the AFP's Assistant Commissioner Mr Lee that was read onto the record by the President yesterday in this House refers to investigation of offences, being breaches of sections 92.3 (1) and 92.3 (2) of the Commonwealth Criminal Code 1995. Insofar as those offences are concerned, I continue to assert that I am not the focus of the investigation or in breach of any law. Further, Mr Lee described the determination of the privilege claim by the New South Wales Parliament as considered and appropriate. Finally, I thank my colleagues for their warmth in welcoming me back into this Chamber.