On 30 June, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese attended a large lunchtime function of the Australia Israel Chamber of Commerce (AICC) to spruik the Voice. The AICC website says its role is to enhance non-partisan business networking at senior levels and vigorously promote bilateral trade through inbound and outbound trade missions. Exactly what this has to do with the Voice is unclear, but likely when the PM is guest of honour then the subject is as he chooses.

Shortly after the function concluded the PM took to his social media to declare, ‘I’m heartened that so many Jewish groups, along with such a broad spectrum of multicultural groups and faith groups, will campaign for Yes to constitutional recognition this year.’

However, feedback to the Australian Jewish Association, by far the largest Australian Jewish organisation, as measured by social media following and community engagement, strongly supports a No trend.

While it is true some prominent members and groups in the Jewish community have indeed declared support for the Voice, they are grossly misleading the government (not for the first time) by claiming widespread majority support. Why they have chosen to do so is open to speculation. Jewish community organisations have not been immune to the long march of the left through the institutions, and some have supported all sorts of woke causes contrary to Jewish values and the Voice is yet another. Or perhaps there are certain individuals riding the political tide and seeking to endear themselves to the Labor party which they judge as being in power for more than one term.

To be clear, the Voice proposal is contrary to Jewish values, contrary to important lessons from Jewish history and presents potential, serious, specific, adverse policy risks for our community.

Firstly, from the perspective of religious principles, it is a foundational belief that all people are created in the image of God. This is a message of equality and teaches us all people should be treated equally. Creating race-based divisions as proposed by the Voice so that there is a race-based mechanism to leverage political influence affecting the lives of all, clearly offends this principle. I’m advised by learned Christians that the same principle exists in Christianity, so the Voice offends an important Judeo-Christian ethic.

Secondly, from a historical perspective Jews will understand from bitter experience that the political creation of ethnic, racial, or religious divisions in a society is not a good thing. It will inevitably cause friction and resentment. Over thousands of years Jews have lived through numerous societies with such divisions and there is not a single example of that type of division being positive. Quite the contrary.

Thirdly and regrettably, we learn that there are some lead players amongst the Aboriginal activists who have expressed extremist views including hostility towards Israel. During the so-called Invasion Day protests on 26 January this year, there are photographs in which only two flags can be seen – the Aboriginal flag and the Palestinian flag. Socialist Alternative which describes itself as Australia’s largest Marxist revolutionary group has published material on Aboriginal solidarity with Palestine. This issue is not just theoretical – during the Sydney Festival last year a boycott was initiated because one act attracted minor sponsorship by Israel. Most Aboriginal artists booked for the festival joined the boycott, a move which surprised moderate Aboriginal leaders such as Nyunggai Warren Mundine. It is a serious risk that left-wing radical Aboriginal activists will use the significant political leverage of the Voice to push the Australian government to pursue anti-Israel policies.

It is noteworthy that despite serious security issues all citizens in Israel have equal voting rights. Indeed, the Knesset (Israel’s parliament) has Arab members including some who can reasonably be described as Islamist and anti-Zionist.

These objections to the Voice do not mean that the Jewish community is unsympathetic to the Aboriginal community, far from it. Jewish people have a long and proud record of combatting racial inequality and played an important role in the black liberation movements. The Jewish community in South Africa worked hard to end apartheid. The most prominent black leader Nelson Mandela was able to train in law because he was given a position as an article clerk in Witkin, Sidelsky & Eidelman, a Jewish firm. Similarly Jewish community leaders marched alongside Reverend Martin Luther King, sometimes carrying a Torah scroll.

King’s message in his powerful ‘I have a dream’ speech is that a person should be judged by the content of their character, not by the colour of their skin. This message is that we should be blind to race. The black liberation movement headed by Martin Luther King demanded equal rights and opposed racial division. It may well be that Rev. King would be appalled at the Voice proposal which if successful would enshrine racial division.

Apart from supporting broad campaigns for equal rights it is a Jewish value to support the disadvantaged. The term tzedakah is often translated as charity but derives from the Hebrew word for justice – giving to assist those less fortunate is just. There is a guideline to give 10 per cent of your income for tzedakah. Tzedakah is not meant to be consumed by large bureaucracies, consultants or wasted on ineffective programmes. There has been no clear evidence that the Voice will make a difference to the most acute problems of disadvantage in remote Aboriginal communities such as school attendance, rates of domestic violence, child sexual abuse and alcoholism.

The Australian Jewish community began with the First Fleet and takes pride in making contributions well in excess of our numbers in fields such as business, law, medicine, academia and the arts. But we do need to reflect on our values and experience and call out a proposal when we see the potential for harm. The Voice is inconsistent with Jewish values and would do great harm to Australia. By unnecessarily placing it in the Australian constitution, the harm becomes permanent.