Jewish leaders condemn Dreyfus for preferencing Greens in Isaacs

Australia’s peak Jewish representative body has written to Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus KC MP expressing “deep disappointment” over Labor’s decision to recommend preferences to the Greens in the federal seat of Isaacs, which Dreyfus currently holds.

In a strongly worded letter sent yesterday, the Executive Council of Australian Jewry (ECAJ) said the decision was especially troubling given the extreme positions of the Greens and their candidate in Isaacs, Matthew Kirwan.

The letter, signed by ECAJ President Daniel Aghion KC, accuses the Greens of promoting “the most extreme expressions of anti-Israel hatred” and fostering a climate that has fuelled acts of antisemitism and intimidation. “From your own public comments in the past, we know that you are aware of how extreme the Greens’ politics have become under their current leadership. You have rightly criticised them for the role they have played in urging on the most extreme expressions of anti-Israel hatred which have become the breeding ground for acts of violence and antisemitic incidents over the last 18 months,” Aghion wrote.

The letter notes that Greens politicians and activists have supported individuals who engaged in “menacing and intimidatory conduct” against Australians, including Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, several Labor MPs and Dreyfus himself. It raises concerns about Matthew Kirwan’s alignment with Greens policies that reject Israel’s right to self-defence and characterise it as an apartheid state. The ECAJ is particularly alarmed by Greens candidates who support arms embargoes on Israel and use rhetoric that echoes the language of delegitimisation.

The ECAJ questioned the political logic of the decision, noting that Isaacs is a safe Labor seat with a margin of 9.5 percent. “The benefit to Labor of giving the Greens second preference escapes us,” Aghion wrote. “We well understand the realities of party politics in Australia, especially at election time, and the tactical nature of preference arrangements. However, as Isaacs is a safe Labor seat… the benefit to Labor of giving the Greens second preference escapes us.”

The letter also draws a contrast with Josh Burns MP, the Jewish Labor backbencher in Macnamara, who successfully persuaded the party to run an open ticket in his seat. “If you, as a senior cabinet minister, had pressed strongly for an open ticket in your own seat, we find it difficult to believe that the party would have refused your request,” Aghion wrote.

While expressing concern, the ECAJ acknowledged Dreyfus’s past contributions to the Jewish community, including in legislative reform and security funding. “We do not in any way under-rate the excellent work that has been done by you and your department,” the letter states. “We would like to help the government build an Australia where such measures are no longer necessary. Refusing to preference the Greens would have been a small but significant step in that direction.”

The letter adds to growing concern within the Jewish community about the Greens’ stance on Israel and their associations with groups accused of promoting antisemitism. Last year, Dreyfus himself accused the Greens of encouraging “riotous and sometimes violent” pro-Palestinian protests outside MPs’ offices. Greens leader Adam Bandt responded by threatening legal action, calling the remarks defamatory.

The ECAJ has excluded the Greens from its 2025 pre-election survey, stating the party’s conduct made engagement futile. “For the first time, we have not sought responses from the Greens due to their consistent bile about Israel and the Jewish community.”
This marked a significant departure from past practice, where all major parties, including the Greens, were given the opportunity to respond to detailed questions relating to issues of concern to the Jewish community.

Whether Dreyfus will respond to the ECAJ’s letter remains to be seen, but the intervention makes clear the widening gulf between the Jewish community and the Greens and raises new questions about Labor’s preference strategies in electorates with significant Jewish populations.