Segal shows no understanding of public policy

Jillian Segal’s antisemitism plan is one of the worst public policy documents produced at any government level in Australia in recent years.

And the quality of the recommendations of this result or the nature of prescriptions, the silence in the Palestinian genocide, or how the proposal can be felt about the effects of a free press, academic freedom and free speech.

Segal says that the plan titled “The Plan of Anti-Antifemitism of the Private Ambassador” was informed by the work of special ambassadors and coordinators who struggled with the work of anti-Semitism (Seccas) in the fields of research, consultations, parliamentary investigations, parliamentary investigations and other authority between 2024 and 2025. It was financed by total allowance. Additional estimates process For “anti -Semitism and the fight against Islamophobia”. The rear end support is provided by the interior portfolio, so it is probably sufficient for about 10 public officials at 6 million dollars of $ 6 million for three years for Segal’s work.

Nevertheless, the report seems to have been written by Segal without any input at home, so a fundamental understanding of how public policy works – for a woman who is the director of Grattan Institute if there is no real public policy experience. Segal suggested unrelated things over and over again.

Like Crirase At the end of last weekends, the proposal to the media “helping to meet the editorial standards and their commitment to impartiality and balance and avoid accepting false or distorted narratives” does not have any understanding of the media regulation. In this way, you cannot regulate non -broadcast media organizations because they are not licensed. All governments can at best add another layer of application to the self -regulation of non -publication media industries.

The worker proposed to make semi -cooked, definitely with the wrong information invoice in relation to online platforms. And Ciikey’s We remember that the memory is a little uncertain, but we remember that right -wing media is angry with the idea of a government, and even try to demand the media organizations to regulate themselves.

Or Segal’s “Police, prosecutors, judicial and regulatory authorities have a proposal to develop guidance and provide a comprehensive education, so that the implementation of the law is informed by the comprehensive understanding of anti -Semitism. A representative is also an extraordinary violation of the separation of powers, the “guidance of the judges, the legislation and the second reading speeches and the priority of the common law?

Last week I was Eltham Crirase The majority of the federal government – not under the legislation of the state and the region, but the fact that it does not have the authority to provide funding to universities organized under the legislation of the Company of Nations for political reasons. He said that the report was written by someone who knows very little about the fact that Australian higher education is actually regulated.

In the legislative change, Segal allowed him to demand the termination of financing for a university on the basis of the claim of anti -Semitism and the university was legally treated? The judge, who listened to the case, is one of the parties on a potentially “comprehensive understanding of anti -Semitism ve and is definitely“ directed ”and“ educated by Segal, who is definitely a witness? What will be the cultural institutions that can reduce their financing?

Later, there is a relatively small issue of the proposal of yüksel Working with publications financed by the public to encourage the programs added for social adaptation ”, which seems to be a direct violation of the legal independence of publishers.

Contradict Segal, governments, ABC and SBS which programs can not manage beyond the specified in the statutes – in the case of ABC, “Contributing and contributing to the sense of national identity and informing and entertaining and refers to the cultural diversity of broadcasting programs. ABC Act Before proposing such an intervention?

Or, “Holocaust and anti -Semitism education in the National and Public School curriculum, the government, Catholic and independent school systems in coordination with appropriate lesson plans in coordination with the proposal.

Now we enter the second decade of teachers and managers (at least) promise current curriculum Already overcrowdedStill more, inevitably “important”, issues with continuous demands to be added. This is not just the complaints of the teacher unions: hard data It shows that the Australian curriculum is significantly larger than already comparable overseas countries. As a commentator observedThis seems to reflect a mentality that the addition of problems to the school curriculum will be a kind of magical bullet to kill annoying social problems, regardless of the real context they put forward.

Indeed, complaints that the school curriculum becomes extremely crowded with too many “soft skills” and simplified to facilitate the return to “foundations”. the right to politics. Interestingly, these “Back to Foundations” species do not seem too complicated to every school in the country in the completion of the education of antisemitism with lessons plans.

If it is a lazy policy to force it to add anti -Semitism to a crowded curriculum, at least all governments can work together and use their funds to ensure compliance with non -governmental schools. However, Segal created a series of other proposals that reflected a seemingly examined ignorance of both law and public policy.