House debates

Wednesday, 27 October 2010

Ministerial Statements

Afghanistan

12:23 pm

Photo of Natasha GriggsNatasha Griggs (Solomon, Country Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I think it is safe to say that we are at a crossroads when it comes to the debate surrounding Afghanistan, and in relation to military conflict it is not the first time we have faced this type of dilemma. History is littered with conflicts that have started out as the right thing to do but over time have lost the public momentum from when they first started. Afghanistan runs the risk of being no different.

In the federal seat of Solomon we have always had a very strong historical link to our Defence Force. From the early days of World War II to our intervention in East Timor in the late 1990s to our current day involvement in Afghanistan, Solomon has played a key role. I recently visited both NORCOM at Larrakeyah and 1st Brigade at the Robertson Barracks in my electorate. Our Defence Force presence in Afghanistan is substantial and has been that way since the conflict first began. Currently we have a number of troop deployments in the Oruzgan province. Through my visits I have gained a sense of how our own troops view their role and of the way they see Afghanistan unfolding. From the outset let me say I support our role and our troops in Afghanistan. I believe we have the most highly trained, highly skilled, dedicated and committed Defence Force, and as an Australian I am grateful for their commitment and service to our country.

Regrettably, the Australian Defence Force has suffered 21 combat deaths and 156 combat injuries. The young men and women who join our Defence Force today know that there is a strong likelihood that they will be deploying for warlike conflict and peacekeeping missions. They are making the choice based on what can only be described as the right humanitarian desire to help other countries and, in particular, the people of Afghanistan to experience what we take for granted in this country—that is, democracy. From my briefings, I understand that our troops are comfortable with their mission objective of mentoring. They feel they are properly equipped for such a role, but they hasten to add that if the mission objectives change then the level of logistics needs to be re-evaluated.

Where there are concerns, they relate directly to the level of support when our troops return from Afghanistan. At present when our troops return they are required to go to Brisbane to be debriefed or rehabilitated, depending on what is needed. In the seat of Solomon we do not have adequate resourcing to support our troops, and that is a major concern. If we were to adopt the role of debriefing and rehabilitation in my electorate then we would use all available resources of counsellors in the seat of Solomon, and that would have further implications in itself.

Sadly, as the mission continues I do not think I am speaking out of turn by suggesting that there is a possibility of more casualties and, heaven forbid, even more fatalities. Both our leaders have indicated we will be in Afghanistan for some time yet, so it stands to reason that this may be the case. It is an unintended consequence that by sending troops to Brisbane for debriefing and rehabilitation we are in fact delaying their return to their families in the Top End. So I would like there to be more support for our troops and their families in the form of counselling during their deployment and also when they return from their deployment. It is critical that we extend this support to the families. The support to the troops is unconditional, and so our support to the families must be equally unconditional. We must provide them as much support as they require. We need to explore the possible extension of the Defence School Transition Aide Program, which assists students whose parents are serving overseas. I have spoken to the shadow minister for defence science, technology and personnel, who has undertaken to meet with the Defence Community Organisation and discuss options to expand the program.

Australia’s military commitment in Afghanistan is relatively modest when you compare it to those of other countries. Still, our 1,550 soldiers have the lion’s share of security responsibility in a province that has long been Taliban heartland, making this our most serious fight since Vietnam, and Afghanistan has been a central front in the most important civilisational struggle of our time. The war in Afghanistan is now three years longer than World War II and is rapidly approaching the stigma, through the attitudes adopted by some in the place, of the Vietnam War. This now leads me on to another area of concern for our troops and one that those who oppose our involvement may in fact be feeding. Our troops want to know that the Australian community supports them. We cannot afford to have a situation unfold, just like it did following Vietnam, where men and women sent to do a job are treated so poorly by a large chunk of Australian society on their return. I for one would be sickened if, as a result of this debate, we suddenly saw the men and women of our Defence Force bearing the brunt of public criticism. We must proceed with extreme caution in how we set about portraying the need for this conflict. By all means question the need for our involvement, but do it in such a way that removes the emotional rhetoric. We see through public opinion polls a waning of support for our involvement in Afghanistan, but we must not make the mistake of translating that into a lack of support for our troops. They are doing a mighty job. They are well trained, they are well thought of and they are widely respected. God help us should the troops who serve in Afghanistan suffer the same type of indignity that those who served in Vietnam had to endure on their return. I caution those in this place that we must stand united behind our troops. I will be supporting our troops and I will be supporting coalition forces to try to build a better future for the people of Afghanistan.

Comments

No comments