Drawing on a submission to the Royal Commission on Antisemitism and Social Cohesion from the Group of Six, Vasiliki Nihas Bogiatzis argues Australia needs a broader understanding of social cohesion grounded in fairness, rights, belonging and democratic trust.

It is rare to hear a Treasurer speak of “social cohesion” on Budget night, rarer still to hear one confess it keeps him awake because we’ve lost sight of its connection to the “fair go.” Jim Chalmers did both on the ABC’s 7.30 after delivering Australia’s 2026 Budget.

He is right to be troubled. “Social cohesion” is a limited, contentious term that falls short of speaking to our better natures. It inadequately addresses structural inequity, human connectedness, fair access, dignity, belonging, diversity, human rights, and political trust.  Nor does it place Indigenous Australia at the forefront of our national identity. To be fair, it’s a big ask.

We are asking a great deal of two words. As well as fairness they must now encompass national identity and address the “we” rather than the “me” of our nation. This is why definitions matter, why they must be challenged, and why robust legal and parliamentary institutions remain critical. The law is society’s final arbiter and it does the heavy lifting to protect citizens from harm.

The antisemitic terrorist attack at Bondi Beach during Hanukkah on 14 December 2025, claiming 15 innocent lives, thrust “social cohesion” into urgent public discourse, proving it is sometimes easier to define in the negative.

The term appears in the Royal Commission on Antisemitism and Social Cohesion, residing near de-radicalisation. This coupling of terminology, configured almost as problem and solution, prompted us, as a Group of Six (GOS) former senior public servants and community activists,........

© Pearls and Irritations