By: Nomi Kaltmann as seen in Ha’aretz
24 July 2025
MELBOURNE – Earlier this month, a year after taking on her new role as Australia’s special envoy to combat antisemitism, Jillian Segal presented the recently elected Labor government with a detailed plan for action.
The 20-page report was officially released by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese who seemed to signal that the recommendations drafted by Segal – standing at his side at the televised event – were being taken seriously at the highest levels of government.
The report outlines a plan for stronger antisemitism education and tougher enforcement.
It also urges the government to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism “across all levels of government, public institutions and regulatory bodies,” to conduct more vigilant screenings of visa applicants in order to weed out possible Jew haters, and to cut funding to cultural and educational institutions, along with public broadcasters, that promote antisemitism – even in the most subtle manner.
The report also proposes a university “report card,” designed to assess how each institution addresses antisemitism, with the possibility of withholding government funding from those that fall short.
‘Intent on turning the page’
Segal, a former president of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, is the first person to serve as antisemitism czar in the country – a position created in response to the dramatic spike in antisemitic incidents following the October 7 Hamas massacre and the war in Gaza.
These incidents include arson at the Adass Israel Synagogue in Melbourne in December and the East Melbourne Hebrew Congregation in Melbourne earlier this month, physical assaults, doxxing, antisemitic graffiti and online abuse.
Indeed, a report prepared by the executive council found a staggering 316% increase in antisemitic violence in Australia in 2024. In her new position, Segal is meant to advise the Australian government on how to combat such expressions of hate, strengthen interfaith relationships, and help shape a national response to antisemitism.
Mainstream Jewish organizations, as might be expected, lauded her report. “There will be sceptics, but the prime minister made a powerful impression and appears intent on turning the page,” said Alex Ryvchin, the executive council’s co-CEO, in a statement issued to the press. “Ms. Segal has consulted widely in formulating the plan and it presents a clear and comprehensive solution to Australian antisemitism. Now it’s time to implement the plan in full.”
The Australian Jewish Association, which describes itself as “a national, membership-based community organisation guided by Torah and centre-right Australian values”, noted in a Facebook post that “on balance, this does appear to be a very constructive report.”
But not all Australian Jews are convinced that Segal’s proposals represent the best path forward. Of particular concern is the recommendation that Australia adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Association definition of antisemitism, which has been criticized for conflating legitimate criticism of Israel with antisemitism.
“The report’s vague language around ‘antisemitic narratives’ or ‘affiliations’ coupled with its emphasis on the discredited IHRA definition of antisemitism, make the actions recommended dangerously unclear,” said Max Kaiser, executive officer of the Jewish Council of Australia, a new left-wing organization that is highly critical of Israel.
“Consistent with her past statements erroneously linking antisemitic attacks with Palestine solidarity protests, Segal seems fixated on driving a pro-Israel narrative and repressing legitimate criticism of Israel’s genocide in Gaza.”
Kate Rosenberg, the executive director of the Australian branch of the New Israel Fund, also warned against conflating legitimate criticism of Israel with antisemitism.
“Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s recent statements affirm that it is possible to criticize the policies of the Israeli government without engaging in antisemitism,” she said. “This distinction is vital for robust democratic debate, both within Australia and among civil society actors in Israel.”
Robert Richter, one of Australia’s most respected Jewish criminal barristers, said the report was too narrowly focused on combating Jew hate rather than all forms of racism. “We do not need special legislated treatment of antisemitism,” he told Haaretz. “The current legal position is adequate.”
Nicole Schwalb, an Israeli Australian lawyer, had similar reservations. “Why don’t we talk about antisemitism in the historical context, and in the context of the current Israeli-Palestinian crisis, and in the context of other ethnic national disputes like Rwanda, the Armenians?” she asked. “We should be widening it out. When we don’t, we other ourselves.”
Schwalb was also perturbed by Segal’s recommendation to block funding to universities that scored low on “report cards” which would assess how they grappled with antisemitism on their respective campuses. She describes such proposals as “silly and even potentially dangerous.”
‘Full support’
By contrast, Suzanne Rutland, a renowned historian of Australian Jewry and a professor emerita at the University of Sydney, believes the report is a good start.
“The upsurge of antisemitism, which is manifested at so many levels of Australian society, is very disturbing and is clearly a threat to social cohesion in Australia,” she says. “Therefore, overall, I am very supportive of Ms. Segal’s recommendations, which are wide-ranging and include a broad and strategic approach to the current problems.”
In addition to criticism of her report, Segal has also faced personal backlash over the recent revelation that her husband’s family trust donated to Advance, a conservative political organization known for its right-wing advocacy. While Segal has denied involvement in her husband’s donation, it has raised questions about her suitability for a senior role in a Labor-led government.
“It undermines the report’s credibility as a community-unifying document, especially given that antisemitism affects people across the political spectrum,” says Melinda Jones, a human rights lawyer and immediate past president of the National Council of Jewish Women of Australia.
Jeremy Liebler, president of the Zionist Federation of Australia, dismisses the critics. “The attempts by those who seek to downplay and undermine genuine efforts to combat antisemitism by calling into question Jillian Segal’s integrity and credentials, should be seen for what it is,” he said.
“Jillian Segal enjoys the full support of the Australian Jewish community and of the prime minister and the home affairs minister.”
He added: “The recommendations are grounded in common sense. They protect free speech while ensuring public money doesn’t fund hate.”
The Australian government has not yet announced which of Segal’s recommendations will be adopted. It remains to be seen then whether this report will mobilize the Jewish community – or deepen existing fractures.
Segal did not respond to a request for comment.