Albanese hides behind undisclosed ‘experts’ in his justification not to launch a royal commission into Bondi

Anthony Albanese has hidden behind undisclosed “actual experts” in his justification not to launch a royal commission into the December 14 Bondi Beach massacre.

The Prime Minister sidestepped questions about the identity of said experts after using the justification during a press conference at the Australian Federal Police headquarters in Canberra on Tuesday.

Despite ongoing pressure for a royal commission, including from the families of those killed and injured, Mr Albanese has resisted calls and instead opted for an independent review to be led by former director-general of security of Australia Dennis Richardson.

The PM insisted the snap review could report “in months, not years” and defended omitting a reference to anti-Semitism in the terms of reference released on Monday.

“Our position is not out of convenience. It is out of conviction that this is the right direction to go in,” Mr Albanese said.

“And the actual experts, who are the current experts, have all recommended this course of action, and we are following the advice that we received from authorities who are in 2025 dealing with this atrocity.”

Mr Albanese avoided questioning about which agencies or experts had advised against holding the royal commission but vaguely answered “we have a national security committee, and we receive advice from all of those bodies”.

While announcing the terms of reference, the PM had also claimed that “extensive consultation” had been undertaken before landing on the decision to launch the Richardson review.

But on Tuesday he avoided questions about if and how the families of victims had been engaged in that process, only referencing the involvement of “the community” in the consultation.

It comes after Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke and NSW Premier Chris Minns earlier insisted the review had to also look at anti-Semitism.

“You can’t have an investigation without an examination of the creeping rise of anti-Semitism. It begins with a chant then migrates on to online then malicious damage, then arson, then horrible acts of violence,” Mr Minns said.

“I do believe it’s an important opportunity to be looking at the circumstances and sequence that led up to this horrifying attack at Bondi on the 14th of December and that includes anti-Semitism in our community.”

Mr Burke added: “There is no way of conducting that inquiry without dealing with anti-Semitism.”

Jewish Australians have expressed outrage after repeated warnings about rising anti-Semitism in the lead up to the terror attack at a Hanukkah event, which claimed 15 lives, including that of a 10-year-old girl named Matilda.

Families of victims had penned an open letter to the Prime Minister, calling on the Federal Government to convene the powerful inquiry to investigate anti-Semitism and questions about law enforcement issues surrounding the mass shooting.

Former foreign minister Julie Bishop told The West Australian on Tuesday that given the nature of the tragedy, it should warrant a Commonwealth Royal Commission.

“In my experience, a royal commission is warranted, given the scale and nature of this tragedy,” she said.

“I would welcome a broad ranging inquiry that enables us as a community to understand the causes (and) receive recommendations that would go to the heart of the scourge of anti-Semitism, racism, and violent extremism. And I think a royal commission has the capacity to take a national perspective,” she said.

Former treasurer and prominent Jewish Australian Josh Frydenberg told 2GB radio on Tuesday that Mr Burke’s defence that a royal commission should not be held because it could “platform extremist views” was reasoning that would’ve prevented significant trials into the The Holocaust.

“The argument that the Prime Minister and Tony Burke were making yesterday, that they don’t want a royal commission because it will platform the worst voices, is akin to saying the Nuremberg trial shouldn’t have been held because you don’t want to platform nazi propaganda,” he said.

“You want to get to the bottom of why this attack occurred in the first place, understand how these people were radicalised in Australia, how they accessed weapons, how they trained overseas, under the nose of our government and the agencies.”

AFP Commissioner Krissy Barrett had flanked Mr Albanese at the press conference on Tuesday to provide an update on the investigation into the father-son duo allegedly responsible for Australia’s worst terrorist attack.

She revealed that authorities believed the men weren’t part of a broader terrorism cell, with no evidence of the pair attending a terrorist training camp on a trip to the Philippines in the lead up to the attack.

Ms Barrett also avoided directly answering a question about whether she thought that a Federal Royal Commission would damage national “unity and security”.

“The first question is not a question for me to answer in relation to a Federal Royal Commission. It’s a matter for Government,” she responded.

Opposition leader Sussan Ley accused Mr Albanese of ignoring the families of victims and called for him to release further details on the advice that shaped his response.

“He’s not listening to the victim’s families, and he’s not listening to the Jewish Australian community,” she said.

“We’ve just had the worst massacre, the worst terrorism event on Australian soil.

“We have a Prime Minister who says it’s not deserving of a Commonwealth royal commission, and ordinary Australians in their millions are asking, why on earth not?”

Nationals leader David Littleproud accused the PM of lacking courage.

“This Prime Minister hasn’t got the courage. He’s looking for political diversions rather than political leadership,” he told Sky News on Tuesday.

He said a royal commission was needed at the Federal level as anti-Semitism wasn’t confined to NSW, where the attack occurred.

“We need to learn from every State as jurisdictions have different counter terrorism agencies. How do they interact and intersect with federal agencies? How do they intersect with one another?” he said.