“Profit Over Principles”: Australia Defends Investments in Israeli Weapons Maker
November 2, 2026
Senator Barbara Pocock exposes the federal government’s bloody bottom line:
In a blatant justification of state complicity, Finance Minister Katy Gallagher defended the federal government’s decision to maintain millions of taxpayer dollars in Israeli arms manufacturers. Confronted during a tense Senate hearing by Greens Senator Barbara Pocock, Gallagher brushed aside concerns regarding a horrific genocide and reduced the ethical catastrophe to a matter of statutory duty, stating the Future Fund’s primary responsibility is to “provide a return on investment.”
During the sharp questioning, Senator Pocock directly challenged the Australian Parliament over public money benefiting entities like Elbit Systems, Israel’s largest defense contractor, alongside tech giant Palantir. Despite Pocock exposing the clear link between public wealth and the automated destruction of human lives, government officials hid behind rigid bureaucratic policy to shield their portfolio from divestment.
When a state uses fiduciary duty as an excuse to pocket profits tied directly to civilian strikes, it proves that international human rights take a back seat to financial gains.
When a government values a line on a balance sheet over human lives, a critical threshold has been crossed.
Is “return on investment” ever a valid excuse to ignore complicity in war crimes? How should citizens hold leaders accountable when they hide behind financial bureaucracy?
Sound off below.
Source: @barbarapocock
#KatyGallagher #BarbaraPocock #FutureFund #DivestmentNow #StopArmingIsrael #viral #highlights #democracy #viralpost #reels #everyonehighlights #news
English Script:
So Elbit Systems was previously excluded from the Future Fund’s investment portfolio because of concerns related to prohibited weapons. When and why was that exclusion lifted? So senator, Elbit Systems was excluded originally on the basis of involvement in the manufacture of cluster munitions. The company was no longer involved in those particular munitions and therefore became investible again.
Has the future fund sought legal advice on the implications of the International Court of Justice July 2024 Advisory opinion for Australian public investments in companies operating in or supporting illegal Israeli settlements.
No,
So we’re in a changing situation, aren’t we? We’ve got 22,000 children who have been murdered in Gaza. We have a lot of Australians very concerned about that, and I would be delighted to have a growing, sovereign wealth fund. But many of them would be extremely uncomfortable with any engagement with firms that are profiting from the murder of children and adults civilians. Have you had any advice from DFAT or the Attorney-General’s Department on these matters?
I don’t believe so. But I don’t know whether our departing shareholder essentially the treasurer in my departments have had any engagement, but I can’t recall any.
Minister, are you comfortable with the sense that our superannuation funds are, in part, built on very significant increases in the profitability in the share price of companies that are clearly engaged in circumstances where human rights are definitely under attack, where we’re losing a lot…
That’s the assertion from the Greens.
It’s a fact. 22,000 children lost. I’m not making that up, minister.
No, but we’re talking about how the future fund invests. We’re not talking about broader matters. We’re talking about the responsibilities the Future Fund has to provide a return on investment.
