Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Mackellar, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Veterans' Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

This will be my last intervention on the Military Memorials of National Significance Bill 2008. It is to simply say that my intention was made clear all along—that the bill would receive the backing of the opposition because it is important for the bill to pass. However, it was important to make the point and hence the amendment, which is of course preceded by the words ‘while not declining to give the bill a second reading’. That is precisely why we did not vote against the bill on the second reading, why we did not divide and why it will go through the Senate unamended. We had to make the point that you cannot just call it a semantic argument and say that a national memorial and a military memorial of national importance are exactly the same. You cannot say that white is just pale black. They are not the same and the distinction had to be made between them.

In listening to the debate it was really very moving to hear many members talk about the significance of memorials that they have in their own electorates. Clearly some of them intend to hopefully see them recognised under the new classification. We will be watching this with interest. I am pleased to hear you say, Minister, that you will be making regulations if you see that that is necessary, because the criteria and the parameters as set up are broad. To comment on your comments relating to the decision you have to make about the term ‘Anzac’, it is the most revered term we have in our lexicon in this area. You and I both agree on that, Minister. I think we both agree also on the significance of the Ballarat prisoner-of-war memorial. It is of enormous significance to the 36,000 who were taken as prisoners of war and to their families.

See this speech in context