Australia’s Largest Christian News Site

IPA Deputy Executive Director Daniel Wild says the Liberal Party abandoned its core principles by backing rushed hate speech laws, warning the sweeping legislation could chill debate and expand government power.

Deputy Executive Director of the Institute of Public Affairs, Daniel Wild, believes the Liberal Party has lost its way after its members of parliament agreed to support the hate speech bill last month.

The passed-in hate speech laws were framed as legislation which would help combat antisemitism in the wake of the Bondi terrorist shootings, which saw 15 innocent people murdered by Islamic State-inspired gunmen on 14 December last year.

But there is a widespread belief that the rushed-in laws could be used by the Albanese Government to stifle debate regarding crucial issues such as whom we let into our country.

A Party Losing Its Principles

Wild – who was a Liberal candidate for Spence in the outer northern suburbs of Adelaide in the lead-up to last year’s federal election – felt the party let itself down and went away from its values.

Those traditional core principles have included individual freedom for all citizens, small government and the maximising of individual and private-sector initiatives.

Wild believes the Liberal Party – now commonly referred to as “a broad Church” of differing views after former Prime Minister John Howard first made this observation – needs to urgently re-examine where it stands.

His comments have come as the party’s popularity continues to plummet with the rise of Pauline Hanson’s One Nation Party, which promises to put Australian taxpayers first as the nation’s last bastion of conservatism.

“This (Liberal MPs voting Yes to the rushed-in hate speech laws) is what happens when you forget what you believe as a party,” Wild told The Daily Declaration as part of an Australian Jewish Association video conference.

“I do think this was a pretty straightforward one. On the process alone, it should’ve been No.

“At a minimum, they should’ve all abstained. Because if they did that, I think the laws probably still would’ve passed the Senate.

“But at least it would’ve sent a message that this was not accepted by the political class as a whole.

“I do think it was a big mistake. The original sin of this was asking parliament to be recalled.

“I think that was a knee-jerk reaction that in large part meant that we’re not talking about the real issues we have in our society that have given rise to these sectarian conflicts.”

Visa Controversy Raises Early Questions

CEO of the Australian Jewish Association, Robert Gregory, added the hate speech laws immediately prevented a Jewish social media influencer from entering Australia.

Sammy Yahood – a London-raised kickboxer now living in Israel – had been due to speak in Melbourne as part of a Young Jewish Professionals event in January.

But his visa was cancelled by Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke on Australia Day, just three hours before his scheduled flight from the United Arab Emirates.

Burke now has the power to revoke more visas in the future if he alone deems visitors will potentially be bringing hate to our shores.

“Almost immediately after the laws passed, a separate part of the laws expanded the powers of Tony Burke regarding immigration,” Gregory said.

“And the first person who he revoked a visa from was a guy called Sammy Yahood, who was coming on a speaking tour of many large synagogues in different cities and to different Jewish organisations.

“One of which was AJA. I didn’t see any of the other (Jewish) organisations speak up about it, but he was speaking quite widely.

“I thought it was quite ironic that the first use of part of these laws was reportedly against a Jewish visitor from Israel.

“That just shows giving the power to Tony Burke, I don’t think is a good idea.”

Burke said blocking Yahood’s entry to Australia was because he believed he was coming to preach divisiveness.

“If someone wants to come to Australia, they should apply for the right visa and come for the right reasons,” he said in a statement.

“Spreading hatred is not a good reason to come.”

Migration, Values and Rising Tensions

Wild said the rushing in of hate speech laws after the biggest terrorist attack in Australian history was not the solution to combating race or religious-based violence.

He believes stricter vetting on potential migrants who hate our egalitarian values offered more of a practical solution to a rise in antisemitism and Judeo-Christian values.

This hatred has infiltrated the Western world in the aftermath of the Hamas terrorist attacks on innocent Israeli citizens on October 7, 2023.

“We have a migration system that hasn’t been very discerning when it comes to Australian values,” Wild said.

“We have a test that has to be applied and an oath that needs to be read out.

“But it’s very thin and very weak, and there are no enforcement mechanisms.

“Once people are here, the horse has bolted. So this is why I’m really encouraging in public debate for us to be serious about the debate on immigration.

“We need to have a debate about values and the kind of people who are coming into the country.

“I think most people who come here want to do the right thing. But there’s obviously a sizeable minority that do not.”

The former Liberal Party candidate added the hate speech laws now have potential to have a “chilling effect” throughout the country, where people will stay quiet on certain issues out of fear they could attract attention from the federal government.

“There’s the chilling effect where you say ‘I’m better off not saying anything because I’m scared I’m going to get prosecuted’,” he said.

“So I just won’t say anything at all. I just won’t engage in debate. And it only takes one or two prosecutions under this law to have a chilling effect on public debate.”

Wild believes most people on the steps of the Sydney Opera House reportedly chanting “where are the Jews?” on October 9, 2023, following the Hamas terror attacks which killed over 1,200 Israelis in southern Israel, were Australian citizens.

That means those people cannot be deported.

“My fear is that, yes, we can theoretically remove people from our society who are on visas. But a lot of them are citizens,” he said.

“And I can guarantee there would’ve been a lot of them at the Opera House on October 9 who are natural-born citizens or Australians.

“That’s not fixable. That’s a generation. That requires a whole-of-society approach to remove that extremism out of certain individuals.”

Fear of a Chilling Effect on Debate

Wild also fears the new hate speech laws will be used against conservative groups or organisations who voice their opposition to Albanese Government policies due to their wide-ranging powers.

“The legislation talks about hate crimes in various different ways, in how it defines a hate crime,” he said.

“You can see how broad and subjective this definition is. It says ‘a hate crime is also conduct, or the threat of conduct, where it is engaged in or threatened before or after this section commences’. That’s the retrospective component.

“That involves or would involve one or more of the following: Causing serious harm to a person. And harm doesn’t just mean physical harm. It can mean psychological harm, economic harm, physical harm or social harm.”

He added the laws could be used to prosecute groups such as the No campaign, which opposed the Albanese Government’s race-based Voice to Parliament referendum in 2023.

The Voice would have boosted indigenous parliamentary numbers and included an indigenous advisory body, but the majority of Australians voted No on the basis that it went away from the nation’s current meritocracy model.

“The No campaign could easily have been said to be a hate group for causing psychological harm against the Australian community,” Wild said.

“This is the problem with the vagueness of that. Having these laws and the fact these laws give this current government so much power, and the current Home Affairs minister so much power, tells us that the risk is it’s going to be used in that direction.

“Yes, these laws can absolutely be used against organisations that are conservative organisations.”

___

Featured image: Deputy Executive Director of the Institute of Public Affairs, Daniel Wild, believes the Liberal Party has lost its way after supporting the new hate speech laws, rushed through parliament in January. Picture: Josh Spasaro.