Social cohesion is about respect, participation, belonging, trust, and shared responsibility and obligations.
Proudly Embracing Modern Australia
McKell Institute, Sydney - 25 February, 2026
In December last year (2025) I spent a weekend working in Amritsar in Punjab State, India.
Curiously, I was the first Australian Government Minister to visit Punjab since Tony Abbott in 2014, despite Punjabi being the fastest growing language in Australia, and Sikhism one of the fastest growing faiths.
Gloriously, amidst an intense six days of back-to-back meetings and engagements across India, Sunday morning was free, so the High Commission organised three Multicultural Affairs engagements.
Amritsar is home to the Sri Harmandir Sahib – the Golden Temple – the most sacred temple in Sikhism, hosting the world's largest community kitchen – serving langar to over 100,000 people every day. You didn't have to be Sikh to feel the love and reverence for this incredible, holy place radiating from the hundreds of thousands of worshippers.
Amritsar is also the site of the brutal 1919 Jallianwalla Bagh massacre of unarmed independence protestors, ordered by British Brigadier-General Dyer, which changed the course of history. As Mahatma Gandhi concluded that accommodation and compromise with the British Raj was impossible.
Laying a wreath at the memorial – unusually cleared of all crowds as an Indian Governor was visiting at the same time – was haunting.
Amritsar is also home to the Partition Museum, located less than 30 kilometres from the India – Pakistan border.
In confronting detail, the galleries reveal the horrific human consequences of the hasty partition of British India, to cleave off Pakistan.
What ensued is a visceral reminder of the dangers to any human society if inter-communal tensions are mishandled, misused or unleashed.
Upward of 2 million people lost their lives. A study by Yale, Harvard and Chicago University academics estimates that 3.4 million people went 'missing'.
The rapid mass movement of people was one of the largest recorded migrations in human history, with an estimated 20 million people displaced after waking up on the 'wrong side' of the border.
Historians have struggled to fully document the immense human suffering. In just two incidents, 3,000 Muslims were murdered by Sikhs in Amritsar, then in Kamoke 3,000 Hindu and Sikh refugees were murdered by Muslims. Trains were hijacked and sent on to their destination full of blood-soaked corpses. As law and order collapsed, massacres and looting erupted with women and children targeted.
This isn't a history lecture, and you get the point. Numerous societies have slipped into conflict or fallen apart when inter-communal fear and forces of hatred run out of control: the troubles in Ireland between Protestants and Catholics; genocides in Rwanda, and Srebenica in Bosnia-Herzegovina; the civil rights struggle in America; the Holocaust; conflicts in Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Sudan, Ethiopia; and countless others.
It is an instinctive part of human nature to fear what we don't understand or know, but the lowest form of politics surely is when so-called leaders play with these forces, stoking divisions and weaponising differences for gain.
Just a few days after I returned home, Australia suffered the worst ever terrorist attack on our soil. A shocking, antisemitic attack, the killings at Bondi Beach fuelled by a radical Islamist ideology, a perversion of Islam, challenged two core aspects of our national self conception: that we don't do guns and mass shootings, and we don't do inter-communal violence here. Those things happen elsewhere.
Yet the horrible reality is that even we today are not immune to the forces of hatred which, if ungoverned, can spiral out of control.
To be clear, I haven't gone all dystopian! I remain optimistic and confident that Australia will come through this stronger and more united than before.
We cannot be complacent, however, in the face of the failure and rightward drift of the clown show that is the Coalition, leaving a vacuum for the re-emergence of Pauline Hanson's One Nation grievance machine. The political equivalent of Dementors from Harry Potter, One Nation consumes positive feelings, engendering fear, anxiety and emotional despair and should not be underestimated. To quote Peter Hartcher's Valentine's Day article in the SMH:
"Australia is in a moment of extreme political fluidity…If the Liberals want to satiate their Murdoch-Sky base…they will be reduced to a rump …a new right-wing coalition could emerge with Hanson as a dominant figure."
Malcolm Turnbull describes the risk as "A dark nightmare…that we end up with Hanson and something truly awful."
With actual, real-life Nazis on the streets in 2025, the sort of division being fomented by Hanson and Joyce, Hastie and Price and their supporting cabals is not just damaging, it's playing with fire in a nation as diverse as ours. ASIO has warned of nationalist and racist extremists continuing their efforts to 'mainstream' and expand. Australians need only turn on their TVs to see what can ensue in other Western democracies, which extremists and One Nation opportunists seek to import and foment here.
Such politics is especially dangerous in Australia, as we are a wonderfully peculiar society. As Yascha Mounk sets out in his 2022 book The Great Experiment: Why Diverse Democracies Fall Apart and How They Can Endure, super diverse, multicultural liberal democracies are rare, and relatively new in history.
Most multicultural societies were autocratic (think empires of old), and most democracies were monocultural, so in a sense we are a recent experiment in how to make a remarkably diverse democracy work. And we have absolutely made it work.
Indeed, our human diversity is modern Australia's defining characteristic and surely our greatest strength. But Australia cannot ever take our social cohesion or success for granted. Cohesion is not an end state; it is a dynamic process that requires constant attention, work and investments.
Just a word on language, as social cohesion has become a phrase de jour. It is rightly a key focus of the Royal Commission. But it doesn't really say much to everyday people.
Simply put it is how we live well together. How we treat one another, how we debate our differences, how we share a sense of fairness even when we disagree, how we preserve what we've built. Social cohesion is about respect, participation, belonging, trust, and shared responsibility and obligations. Listening before judging, helping a neighbour, engaging in civic life, and accepting and respecting the institutions that bind our society together.
Even before Bondi, stresses, fractures and fragility in social cohesion were apparent. While the Scanlon Foundation's reports find that the headline measure of social cohesion is holding up even modest declines in public support for multiculturalism and rising negative attitudes towards certain groups of Australians over the last three years give cause for concern.
Negative attitudes are particularly apparent against: Australians who are Muslim or Jewish; and certain ethnicities – notably African, Middle Eastern, Indian and Chinese heritage Australians – curiously, all groups that the Liberal party has picked on or failed to defend in recent years.
Recent stresses are in part and very visibly due to the shameful weaponisation of the horrific war in Gaza by the Liberals and the Greens political party seeking votes and partisan gain.
But there are deeper, powerful forces tugging at the threads of the beautiful tapestry that is modern Australian society.
The ubiquity of the internet, of digital and social media, make it increasingly possible to live in Australia yet exist in bubbles. Connected 24/7 with a home or ancestral country, receiving information in first languages from foreign sources. The impacts of algorithms and social media echo chambers in breeding polarisation are well documented.
Growing inequality alongside an overemphasis on identity politics are also major contextual changes of recent decades, as well as targeted malign influence by authoritarian state actors.
Globally connected Australia is not immune from overseas political influences. Rising extremist ideologies and authoritarian politics in Europe, the USA (including right wing extremism and the recently internationalised CPAC) and other regions (including Islamist extremism) have spillover effects into our society and politics.
Those weaponising issues of culture and race have long been peddling an outrageous, giant lie. To quote former Prime Minister Paul Keating in 1996:
"The great tragedy of the shamelessly regressive politics of Pauline Hanson is not so much that it is rooted in ignorance, prejudice and fear, though it is; not so much that it projects the ugly face of racism, though it does; not so much that it is dangerously divisive and deeply hurtful to many of her fellow Australians, though it is; not even that it will cripple our efforts to enmesh ourselves in a region wherein lie the jobs and prosperity of future generations of young Australians, though it will—the great tragedy is that it perpetrates a myth, a fantasy, a lie. The myth of the monoculture. The lie that we can retreat to it."
Even truer now, than it was then. The real issue is not whether Australia will remain diverse, as it will. The actual question is whether Australia will remain successful, stable and prosperous, or whether polarisation and failures in social cohesion will see more division, distrust and disengagement, undermining our security, productivity and prosperity.
Debates over the scale and focus of the migration program are entirely legitimate. There are genuine community anxieties, though Australia does not suffer from 'mass-migration' – we have a sophisticated and orderly migration program, including tightly controlled borders. Net overseas migration was unsustainably high and is now falling – yet diversity and migration are being weaponised in similar ways as overseas.
So let me now share some musings about the months and years ahead.
Firstly, with respect to multicultural policy which has broadly served Australia well, providing important individual and communal rights, as well as obligations.
The promise of Australian multiculturalism simply understood is the great Australian promise of a fair go – that everyone gets a fair crack at life here no matter their background, identity or how long they have been here.
While we do well overall, for too many Australians we do not live up to that promise, including through structural racism and economic exclusion. First Nations Australians have long experienced and understood these issues.
Minister for Multicultural Affairs Dr Anne Aly is driving a stronger focus on an enhanced, practical multiculturalism: improving the migrant experience, particularly skills recognition and employment. Getting a job improves pretty much every settlement outcome. In turn, as people are seen to contribute they are accepted, even by those sceptical of migrants.
The Whitlam Government articulated multiculturalism in 1973, which was formally adopted in 1978 by the Fraser Government. While presentation, architecture and initiatives were refreshed under Hawke, Gillard and Turnbull, and the 2024 Multicultural Framework Review examined settings, the core policy tenets have remained stable for decades.
The definition of multiculturalism in the Hawke Government's 1989 National Agenda for Multicultural Australia has stood the test of time, with three key dimensions:
- The right to cultural identity (within limits);
- The right to equal opportunity and fair treatment (social justice); and
- The need to recognise and utilise the diverse skills and talents of migrants (economic efficiency).
Importantly though, the rights of Australians to express their cultural heritage and complex identities is not absolute: they exist "within carefully defined limits" and sit alongside Obligations.
Obligations for everyone include:
- A shared and unifying commitment to Australia first and foremost;
- Acceptance of the basic structures and principles of Australian society including the Constitution, tolerance, Parliamentary democracy, equality and English as the national language; and
- Accepting the right of others to express their views and values.
One challenge for the progressive Left with our instinctive values-based focus on rights, is to remember that there are limits to cultural expression, and to champion the Obligations that come with being Australian.
Prime Minister Albanese speaks of the 'Australian covenant' – the deal if you like – whereby Australians expect those who choose to settle here to not import foreign communal conflicts into our society – to 'leave their shit at the door' and get on with others in the spirit of mutual respect.
It is a myth of course that most migrants don't integrate – they overwhelmingly do. But the trap for progressives is to fail to acknowledge that concerns are real, and to act when genuine issues arise.
Many decent Australians have attended 'Marches for Australia' or may vote for One Nation. Good people are peddled lies on social media, and fear and anger in right wing media. They deserve to be listened to, rather than dismissed: the economic concerns of frankly 'pissed off' people or worries about integration are real.
Progressives must also not be scared to call out unacceptable cultural practices or expressions that breach core tenets of modern Australian multiculturalism. A few examples.
The demonisation by Hanson and much of the Liberal Party of Muslim Australians is disgusting and must be loudly called out. We also must not fail to call out and combat the dangers of radical Islamist politics and ideologies – those pushing such ideas are outside the norms of Australian society. New laws to crack down on hate preaching are partly though not solely a response to this. Ironically, if the extreme right took time to sit down to listen and talk with Muslim communities they would realise this is a shared fear; most Muslim mums and dads share these concerns and are the best defence against these forces.
The weaponisation of old tribal and ethnic conflicts from Afghanistan in south-east Melbourne by a handful of so-called leaders, along with the Greens political party and Liberals at the last election, is deeply frustrating to most Australians from Afghanistan who want to leave that stuff behind. It echoes similar dynamics reported to me by young Australians of African heritage, exasperated at pressure by some parents to perpetuate old tribal feuds. Aggressively acting that stuff out in Australia is not acceptable.
I'm also concerned about extremely culturally conservative behaviour manifesting in gender segregation in pockets of newly arrived communities, alongside concerns regarding forced marriage. To be clear, this is not religious, these are cultural issues against Australian values. Women have the right to participate freely and be seen and heard in every part of Australian society.
Reports from high schools in parts of Melbourne (and no doubt elsewhere) about homophobic abuse of gay kids in schools by some newly arrived migrants from multiple countries and faith groups is completely unacceptable. Queer Australians have the same rights as anyone else, and gay kids should be free to be themselves without fear of abuse.
Calling such things out can be done in a way that asserts shared Australian values without smearing an ethnic or religious group and we should not be afraid to do so. In fact, it is our responsibility to do so.
Aside from specific examples of unacceptable behaviours, a systemic risk is that super-diverse societies may break into separate groups.
Diversity alone in modern Australia is not and cannot be a sufficient goal. Successful multiculturalism means: cherishing communal identities; building bridges between diverse groups; and celebrating things we all have in common.
It is social distance, misinformation and polarisation that create a lack of empathy and vulnerability to hate and extremism, not diversity itself. Overemphasising communal identities risks atomising society and degrading the links between people and groups, as well as the things Australians have in common.
Hence we need to critically reflect and intentionally focus on the relational dimension between groups in Australian society – the intercultural piece – to enhance empathy and mutual respect.
In nerdy policy terms, social capital can be thought of as 'bonding capital' and 'bridging capital'. Humans generally find bonding social capital, but without bridging social capital the strength of those bonds can be a negative. While churches and sporting groups have strong bonding social capital, so do Neo-Nazis, criminal gangs and ISIS. Intercultural thinking is all about bridging social capital.
Overall, we should be optimistic given the positive experience of everyday life of most Australians in neighbourhoods, workplaces, clubs and communities, divorced from the loud and aggressive voices of Nazis, One Nation and the new right wing of the Liberal Party. To paraphrase my colleague Tim Watts 'in modern Australia we respond to bushfires in hard hats, akubras, turbans and hijabs, side by side, looking out for people in need.'
In some areas though our society's institutions and systems militate against intercultural connections and deeper social cohesion.
A big question is the growth in faith-based schools and home-schooling which mean that it is increasingly possible to grow up in Australia from Prep to Year 12 without ever really mixing outside your faith or even ethnic group.
Some parents got me thinking about this last year as they shared the conundrum they felt in wanting to send their kids to a local Islamic school where they felt they'd be safe and thrive in their learning, but worried that they may not get to know and make friends with other Australians of different backgrounds. Some facts to consider:
- Over the last decade there were 320 new Catholic and independent schools, and only 279 new Government schools.
- Over the last seven years the proportion of students attending a school with a religious affiliation across Australia has grown and in 2025 surpassed one third, to reach 33.9% or 1.4 million students.
If trends continue, we can expect to see steady growth in the number of faith-based schools, attended by a higher proportion of Australian kids – Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Sikh and more.
Alongside this, while modest still in overall numbers, home school registrations have grown rapidly over the last five years by: 116% in NSW; 85% in Victoria; and a startling 232% in Queensland. There are reports of quite extreme or conservative curricula being used which gives cause for pause and reflection if this trend continues. What is being taught to these kids? Are they mixing with broader society?
To be clear, this is not an argument against faith-based schools – I attended one myself – but it is worth reflecting on the implications and whether systemic responses are needed to strengthen bridging capital.
For example, Singapore has deliberate policies and a 'Co-curricular' activities system to bring students from diverse backgrounds together (inter-school sport, social activities etc.) Participation is compulsory for all secondary students and strongly encouraged for others.
What could that look like in the Australian context? Could States and Territories consider structural changes in school systems to ensure all Australian children mix outside their ethnic and faith groups in sporting, social and other activities throughout their education?
More community-based or community-engaged settlement responses to welcome new Australians may help them to integrate more quickly.
The Commonwealth will not and need not have all the answers or ideas – the States, Territories and – especially – local governments are key. Funding activities that bring different groups together, sharing spaces and events rather than standalone activities or facilities, and investing in community-led intercultural resilience – Jewish-Muslim, migrant-mainstream, interfaith youth, cross cultural sports teams and competitions.
Community engagement can generate practical ideas to develop practical activities to strengthen inter-communal relations.
There is a hunger for this. I door knocked Joanne in Endeavour Hills last year who'd lived in her house for over 50 years – it was the first built in the court and she raised her kids there. She liked the changed multicultural neighbourhood, but felt sad that people didn't get to know each other in the street like the old days as everyone now went to their own gatherings. She wanted more festivals, seniors groups and neighbourhood street parties that everyone went to. Views I've heard numerous times from others.
We can also look to other nations. Singapore is an interesting case study. Its government pursues a deliberate and, in many respects, successful state-led multicultural policy of integration, pragmatism and social cohesion. At times it has been dismissed by many Western countries as 'social engineering' but is particular to Singapore's history and context.
Singapore is strongly focussed on building and renewing intercultural and inter-religious trust, understanding and communication. Aiming to safeguard economic growth in a labour-scarce city with a high migrant workforce, and to prevent social fragmentation and inter communal tensions which could undermine stability and progress.
Not all aspects of course of Singapore's approach are relevant to Australia, but it's an interesting case study to reflect on.
Done well, intercultural initiatives will resonate with Australians, and over time should foster reduced prejudice and social polarisation, stronger integration and trust between communities and institutions, and greater resilience to hate-based violence and misinformation.
Before I close, a final few words on patriotism.
Australians still need things that we all have in common: principles that everyone is expected to sign up to; values we share; and events and moments broadly marked and celebrated together.
'Progressive patriotism' as the Prime Minister has talked about – means pride in Australia and an unashamed, overt focus on an inclusive form of patriotism, striving for a shared Australian identity.
This talks to multicultural communities who love Australia, have integrated and want to belong, as well as 'Anglo' Australians.
Proudly embracing modern Australia means not shying away from love of our country, traditions and common symbols. Inclusive patriotism helps to combat and blunt the rise and threat of right-wing authoritarianism and exclusive nationalism.
We should see this as part of Labor's big social democratic project that promises Australians more security, prosperity and opportunity than hollow right-wing populism, angry nationalism and the politics of grievance.
Getting this right really matters for the country, and for Labor – you need only look at our sister social-democratic parties overseas to see what struggling to effectively grapple with these dynamics looks like.
Controversially to some, I believe this means embracing Australia Day for as long as there is no consensus to change the date, as a day to reflect, celebrate and be proud of our country and our complex history. Accepting that the day will mean different things to different people. Many decent, good Australians love Australia Day and a public holiday before the school year kicks off. Many of us like to don Aussie garb and people don't want to be sneered at for loving Australia.
Why on earth would we cede our flag, our national day and institutions as propaganda for extremists and the hard right?
We can all mark Anzac Day, and treasure our British Parliamentary democratic inheritance alongside Indigenous history and culture, and celebrate new people taking Australian citizenship as a welcome act of patriotism. And you can also disagree with anything I've said, agreeably.
The Liberal Party and One Nation will keep trying to claim this space, but in a dishonest, narrow, fearful way that excludes and demonises swathes of Australian society.
In doing so they show they do not love our country as it really is – they actually hate modern Australia and millions of Australians.
In conclusion, we can be concerned and not complacent about the moment we find ourselves in, but proud and optimistic about our future.
I'm incredibly proud to be a member of the most diverse government in Australia's history – a Government that looks, sounds and thinks like modern Australia. The contrast couldn't be clearer.
Thank you to our hosts McKell for contributing to Australia's progressive public policy debate, and to everyone for coming along at short notice.