The two reasons Dutton rejected Albanese’s October 7 motion

A flurry of last-minute meetings on Tuesday morning between Anthony Albanese and Peter Dutton could not avoid an acrimonious division on what was envisioned as a bipartisan moment to mark the anniversary of the terror attacks that killed about 1200 Israelis.

The opposition leader was withering in his rejection of the prime minister’s motion commemorating the October 7 massacre, saying Albanese stood condemned for trying to “walk both sides of the street in relation to what has been a very divisive debate for our country”.

Dutton told the House of Representatives that Albanese had designed his motion “for his own political domestic advancement and that has been recognised by millions of Australians, and for that, the prime minister should be condemned”.

Dutton wrote to Albanese in a letter dated Sunday, October 6, but which Labor sources said was received on Monday, “seeking your agreement to co-sponsor the attached motion commemorating the anniversary”.

While both motions unequivocally condemned the Hamas attacks, expressed solidarity with Jewish Australians and condemned antisemitism, they differed in that Labor’s motion called for a de-escalation, a ceasefire and a two-state solution.

The Coalition’s motion included stronger repudiations of Australians who support “barbarous” terror organisations such as Hezbollah, and stated that Israel shares the “same liberal democratic values as Australia … and affirm that Israel’s battle is a battle fought against the enemies of civilised people everywhere”.

On Tuesday morning, the leaders met twice in Parliament House to see if they could find common ground, according to three sources familiar with the negotiations who sought anonymity because the conversations were private.

The parties discussed whether to split up the motions, with one related solely to October 7 and another to the broader Middle East conflict.

Dutton was firm in his stance that the motion should only reference matters related to October 7 and not go into a ceasefire and two-state solution.

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton said the prime minister’s motion went too far. Credit: Alex Ellinghausen

But Albanese believed it was necessary to make these points and call for adherence to international law, to ensure the motion was acceptable to both Jewish Australians and others including Muslims who grieve the deaths of tens of thousands of Palestinian and Lebanese citizens.

On October 7 last year, Hamas fighters killed almost 1200 people in Israel and took another 250 hostage. In the ensuing conflict in Gaza, more than 41,000 people have been killed, according to the enclave’s Hamas-run health ministry.

One Labor source said they were stunned by Dutton’s decision to reject Labor’s motion.

“It was all about the politics,” the source said, claiming Dutton was never genuine about wanting a bipartisan position.

However, Liberal sources said the opposition had asked the government about a parliamentary commemoration last week and had not heard back.

Dutton argued in his rejection of the government’s motion that Labor was guilty of going too far.

“The motion moved by the prime minister today is not just words of comfort and words of recognition in relation to October 7, and I acknowledge those words in his motion. But of course, it goes beyond that, and it’s an extension of the way in which the prime minister has conducted the debate himself over the course of the last 12 months, trying to please all people in this debate,” Dutton said.

“Now is not the time to call for [this].”

The prime minister defended his government’s stance on the war.

“Let’s be very clear: Australia’s position is consistent with other democratic countries. I’ve issued multiple statements with the prime ministers of Canada and New Zealand,” Albanese said.

“We know it’s only through diplomatic efforts [that] this cycle of conflict and bloodshed can be broken. Escalation denies diplomacy any chance of working.”

Australia backed Israel’s right to defend itself, the prime minister said. “We always have and we always will.”

The government’s motion passed the House with 85 for and 54 against after teal and independent MPs backed Labor.

All of the teals except for Zali Steggall supported Dutton’s alternative motion when he moved it after question time, but Labor had the numbers to reject it.

Rancour over the Middle East also marred Senate question time, where independent Lidia Thorpe marched briefly into the chamber yelling “this is shameful! This is genocide” while Greens senators were rebuked by Senate President Sue Lines as “disgraceful” for holding up “sanctions now” signs in contravention of standing orders.

Jewish Liberal MP Julian Leeser said the opposition could not agree with a motion that called for a ceasefire given Israel was in an existential campaign against Iran and its proxies.

“We wanted to see a bipartisan resolution. But there’s too much difference in what this motion suggests in relation to the foreign policy of this house,” he said.

Jewish Labor MP Josh Burns said: “I say that this today, in this place, this motion, does recognise the pain of October 7.”

Top Jewish community groups were mixed in their stances on Labor’s motion, with one saying it offered a “principled and clear” condemnation of antisemitism but two others called it “wrong-headed”.

Cut through the noise of federal politics with news, views and expert analysis. Subscribers can sign up to our weekly Inside Politics newsletter.