Jillian Segal: ‘I don’t know that we’re safer’

Australia’s Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism Jillian Segal has declined to say the Jewish community is safer than it was two years ago, despite listing progress across universities, health, the arts and the public service.

Pointing to ASIO’s assessment that the risk of a terror attack remains probable, Segal told The AJN this week, “I don’t know that we’re safer, but we have to keep going, and we have to educate people, and we also have to ensure that people understand that they should not bring overseas hatreds to Australia.”

Segal was speaking after releasing ASECA Priorities, an updated roadmap that identifies modern, progressive antisemitism as the most pervasive form facing Australia, alongside Islamic extremism, far-left and far-right antisemitism. It says the phenomenon has taken root in universities, media, arts organisations and human rights non-government organisations.

She was careful to distinguish the target of that finding. “It’s absolutely not a dig at everyone who’s progressive,” she said. “Antisemitism is this virus that keeps morphing, and that’s what we’ve seen today. It takes the hostility of the Islamist extremism and far-left antisemitism, and puts through it all the antisemitic tropes, and then gives it a respectable face through the language of social justice and human rights.

“A lot of progressive people would be shocked that their take on life and their very commendable view of working for human rights and social justice has been almost captured by the language that they use, but really to foment hate and to push antisemitism.”

Asked about those on the far left who accuse her of acting for Israel, Segal was blunt.

“I don’t think we should prioritise them for the moment,” she said. “We should focus on the vast majority of Australians who are absolutely good people, and who really are somewhat confused by what they see on their social media feeds. They don’t understand it, and we need to explain to them what’s happening. It’s the good people in the middle that I think we should prioritise here.”

Universities

On universities, where Greg Craven’s report card found no institution had properly adopted and operationalised a definition, Segal said there had been significant progress since.

Education Minister Jason Clare’s new anti-racism standard takes effect on January 1 and will require all universities to adopt definitions of antisemitism, Islamophobia and First Nations hatred. The regulator, the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA), released its statement of regulatory expectations on antisemitism last week, directing universities to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition and the Universities Australia definition.

“They have to fully, what I call, operationalise it. They have to put it in their codes of conduct, their policies, their complaint schemes, their disciplinary procedures, and it will be the job of the regulator to monitor this,” Segal said. “And the regulator can call them out, but fine them also if they don’t.”

She said she would monitor that for about a year and suspend the report card process, turning her attention to campus culture. A gathering of universities is planned for late November, with Anti-Defamation League board member and universities expert Sharon Nazarian coming to Australia for it.

Funding conditions

On enforceable funding conditions across the arts, sport and university research, Segal stressed the decision would not be hers.

“Any question of taking away funding, it’s not my decision. I’m talking about those who grant the funding having that power,” she said. “The underlying principle is that government money, which is really taxpayer money, your money and my money, should not be used to foment hate.”

She said she respected academic freedom and the right of artists to provoke. “We need the challenge that artistic expression brings. I totally respect academic freedom and freedom of speech. But that does not in any way justify incitement of hatred.”

Asked whether such conditions would have prevented the OnePath Network grant, Segal would not say, noting it would depend on the information available at the time.

“But my point is, even if they don’t have the information at the time, but then it is discovered what the particular organisation is doing, and it meets the threshold test of being antisemitic, then they have the power to yank the grant. So it’s not a static thing that people get forever.”

Migration

Segal said Home Affairs decision-makers needed education to assess visa applicants before arrival rather than relying on cancellation afterwards.

“We are seeing instances where visas have been granted and then antisemitic commentary online has come to light, and the full scope of someone’s engagement, and they then have to deal with taking the visa away from them, which is much harder,” she said.

A trial has begun with Home Affairs for senior decision-makers, work she expects to be taken over by the new National Centre for Education Against Antisemitism (NCEAA), chaired by Catherine Fritz-Kalish and Jennifer Westacott.

“I don’t think it’s fair to expect people to understand it without education,” she said.

Public broadcasters

Segal acknowledged the ABC and SBS had pushed back strongly at the Royal Commission against her call for an independent ombudsman, and said she did not dispute that independence was essential.

“I think this makes them even more independent, and that’s just a different perspective,” she said.

“It’s not a criticism of the people inside the ombudsman who I’m sure are good people, but they do ultimately report to the board, and can be replaced by the board. And if the complaint is about the policy of the board or the editorial policy or the way it’s applied, it is an independent person, but ultimately, I don’t think they have complete independence.”

Her office stressed that what was being asked was no different to what applies in banking, telecommunications and superannuation, all of which have ombudsmen external to their boards.

What comes next

Segal said progress had been made across sectors: the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (Ahpra) adopting the IHRA definition as a tool for assessing complaints, a UNESCO antisemitism education trial running in 200 schools, more than 10,000 public servants completing an antisemitism education module, Creative Australia issuing model codes of conduct, and new state and federal laws on hate symbols.

She said draft digital duty of care legislation now before a parliamentary committee did not go far enough.

“It deals with hatred online for children, but it needs to also pick up hatred directed at minority groups. So it needs work, but it is the right principle.”

Her office’s future remains unresolved. Appointed in July 2024 for an initial three years, Segal said the government had given her no indication whether the role would continue beyond July 2027.

“I would expect that they will say something as part of their whole response in relation to the Royal Commission,” she said. “I think definitely the office should continue. It would be hard to think of ending the office when there’s so much to do.”

She said the Royal Commission, which reports on December 18, had been a valuable exercise, and that she had given evidence on at least three occasions.

“So many non-Jews were affected in hearing those experiences,” she said. “We are dealing with an age-old problem that, unfortunately, had already become embedded and normalised in lots of institutions, and it’s going to take a concerted, long-term effort to push it to the margins. But we must continue to do that together.”