I hate to sound negative, but what if the Royal Commission changes nothing?

I hate to sound negative, but it is a question many in the Jewish community are asking quietly, and some are now asking openly: what if the Royal Commission changes nothing?

From politicians, we have heard strong words of support, expressions of solidarity and promises to take antisemitism seriously. But too often those words have not been matched by meaningful action. That failure is precisely what has led so many in our community to place enormous faith in the outcomes of a Royal Commission.

We are being asked to trust the process because trust in political leadership is diminishing, if not already diminished. We are told the Commission will listen, expose failures, recommend reform and lead to meaningful change. We want that to be true. We hope it will be true. But hope is not a strategy, and process is not progress.

And if we have already been let down by politicians, it is only fair to ask whether we are now putting all our faith into another process that may yet fail to deliver.

The Banking Royal Commission concluded more than seven years ago. If a crisis affecting millions of Australians could take that long to produce contested and incomplete outcomes, what confidence should our community have, that antisemitism will be solved simply by announcing another inquiry?

That is not an argument against the Royal Commission. It is an argument against complacency.

Royal Commissions can matter. They can uncover evidence, compel testimony, expose institutional failures, and give voice to people who have been ignored. For a community that has spent years warning about rising antisemitism, the process is important.

But it cannot become the outcome.

Australia has seen Royal Commissions expose serious failures before. The Banking Royal Commission exposed misconduct across financial services. The Aged Care Royal Commission exposed systemic neglect of vulnerable Australians. The Disability Royal Commission documented violence, abuse, neglect, and exploitation. The Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody remains one of the clearest warnings that even historic inquiries can leave communities still waiting for meaningful change decades later.

The lesson is not that Royal Commissions are pointless. Far from it. The lesson is that recommendations do not automatically become reform. Reports do not automatically create safety. Sympathy does not automatically become protection.

That is why the Jewish community is entitled to ask a harder question: what else is being done right now?

Are Jewish schools safer today than they were yesterday? Are synagogues better protected? Are universities being held to enforceable standards on antisemitism? Are police receiving clearer guidance? Are councils being told that intimidation in public spaces is unacceptable? Are there consequences for institutions that repeatedly fail Jewish Australians?

Or are all our eggs being placed in the Royal Commission basket?

Because if that is the strategy, then the risk is obvious. We wait for a report while the climate continues unchecked. We are told to be patient while our children face hostility on campus, while our institutions spend millions on security, while slogans glorifying violence appear in our streets, and while antisemitism is minimised as politics.

We are also told that “education” will be part of the answer.

Fine. But education means what, exactly.

Does it mean another generic diversity session? A symbolic statement? A one-off workshop? A poster campaign? A carefully worded statement of concern?

If education is the solution, then what proven model from anywhere in the world is being followed here?

Where is the evidence base? Where is the curriculum? Where are the measurable outcomes? Who is responsible for delivery? Who is accountable if it fails?

Serious education must do more than teach vague tolerance. It must train people to recognise contemporary antisemitism, conspiracy myths, Holocaust distortion, and the way anti-Jewish hatred often disguises itself through coded political language. It must confront Anti-Zionism when it crosses into Antisemitism. It must address what is actually happening in our schools, universities, workplaces, streets, and online spaces.

Otherwise, “education” risks becoming another comforting word that sounds substantial while changing very little.

The Jewish community cannot afford comforting words. We need practical action.

We need safety now, not eventually. We need accountability now, not after another report. We need leaders willing to confront Antisemitism now, not only once findings are handed down.

None of this is cynical. It is realistic.

Pretending things are getting better simply because a Royal Commission exists creates a false expectation. It tells the public that progress is underway even if conditions on the ground remain unchanged.

So yes, I hate to sound negative. But realism is necessary when a community has already been asked to endure too much.

The Royal Commission may prove valuable. It may even be historic.

But unless it is matched by immediate action, enforceable reform, and political courage, it risks becoming something Australia has seen before: a serious process that diagnosed a problem everyone already knew existed, while those living with that problem were told to wait.

Michael Gencher is the Executive Director of StandWithUs Australia