Director's Newsletter
4 February, 2026
The Centre had a great end to 2025 hosting the Tasmanian launch of Tony Abbott's book 'Australia: a History' in the Reception Room at Parliament House. It was a sellout event with many books sold and great discussion amongst those gathered. I am grateful to Luke Powell and Zachariah Maxwell for initiating the idea for the launch and the Institute of Public Affairs, in particular Brianna McKee, for supporting the event and making a great contribution on the night. Luke also did a great job hosting the Q & A session with Tony.
I have now uploaded the video of the event to the Christopher Dawson Centre YouTube channel and would encourage those who were not able to make it to view the recording at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpAqNV1b_nU
I would also be grateful to all our supporters if you would subscribe to the YouTube Channel and like the videos we upload. Our most popular video continues to be Professor Ian Plimer's talk given back in 2022 which has over 50,000 views!
Government's response to Bondi Massacre
The new year has brought with it considerable political upheaval related to the Albanese Government’s efforts to develop and pass legislation in response to the Bondi Massacre which took place on 14 December.
As you will be aware, the inability of the Coalition to agree on a response to the legislation, the Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism Bill 2026, resulted in a split between the two parties which, if not resolved within the next couple of weeks, will result in the Liberal Party alone becoming the official Opposition.
As someone who has seen firsthand the use of anti-discrimination law to prevent religious freedom, specifically with regard to the case brought against my former boss, Archbishop Julian Porteous, for merely teaching Catholic teaching in the context of the Catholic education system, I am extremely wary of any legislation that seeks to limit or penalise forms of speech or expression.
Despite one’s best intentions to only target what objectively could be regarded as hate speech or inciting violence, the lived experience of such laws is that it is difficult, if not impossible, to prevent their misuse.
What concerns me most is that I have actually heard individuals argue that merely expressing a negative opinion about certain types of behaviour, for example to label an action as immoral or disordered, should be considered a form of hate speech, and in some cases should even be viewed as involving the promotion of violence.
This completely irrational position has unfortunately gained traction in the culture over recent years and stands as a key reason why I believe any kind of ‘hate’ speech legislation constitutes too dangerous a threat to genuine religious freedom, despite whatever good intentions one might have.
Of course, the Jewish community, along with every other faith community, should have the legal protections necessary to safeguard the exercise and expression of their religious belief. Making deliberate and explicit threats of violence against any Jewish person, or indeed any person whatever their faith, should be illegal and strictly enforced by the police.
However, from my initial examination of the legislation that was passed by the Commonwealth parliament and the expert legal advice I have read, this Bill would seem to create far more problems than it solves. In particular, because it does define what constitutes ‘hate’ or ‘hatred’ it could have the effect of actually significantly limiting religious freedom as opposed to protecting it.
Legal expert on this area of law, John Steenhof, Principal Lawyer of the Human Rights Law Alliance, has suggested that as a result of this legislation we could end up in a similar situation to the United Kingdom, where Christians expressing a negative judgment about someone or some action based on their religious beliefs has resulted in prosecution.
Hopefully this will not be the case, but only time will tell.
Alexander Sidhu
Director of the Christopher Dawson Centre