House debates

Monday, 14 February 2022

Private Members' Business

Defence Honours and Awards

11:10 am

Photo of Andrew LamingAndrew Laming (Bowman, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

(1) notes the recent Defence Honours and Awards Appeals Tribunal recommendation to create a new class of medals and clasps which recognise the loss suffered by the families of Australian Defence Force personnel killed or seriously wounded as a result of their service;

(2) acknowledges the advocacy role taken by former SAS serviceman Kerry Danes and his wife Kay Danes;

(3) thanks the veterans and the families of veterans that made submissions to the tribunal; and

(4) urges the Government to complete the consultation process as soon as practicable and ensure that the proposed recognition be applied to all military service on behalf of this nation.

In this motion today, I wish to note, acknowledge, thank and urge. I want to note the very important decision from the Defence Honours and Awards Appeals Tribunal on 25 January, making a recommendation to government relating to recognition of the fallen—those who make the ultimate sacrifice—and those who are injured and wounded in service. Of course, I want to acknowledge the significant 25-year campaign by Kay and Kerry Danes of Alexandra Hills in my electorate, who since 1996—12 June, to be precise—have campaigned for the result that was released by the tribunal on 25 January. Of course, I wish to thank every veteran family that made a submission and every veteran family that was part of these discussions—260 of them in 2021. Of those, 70 made verbal submissions to this inquiry. And I urge my government and every future government to do everything possible to bring this proposal to fruition.

Deputy Speaker, it won't have passed your notice that 25 years is a very long time, and it does reflect the reverence Australia holds for its honours and awards and the importance it attaches to them. Those 25 years have been incredibly frustrating for those who campaigned. I joined this campaign in 2008, when a former coalition colleague and former Assistant Minister for Defence said to me as he retired and completed his term, 'If there's one thing you should continue doing, it is this fight for recognition.' I want to make it very clear what this is. We are proposing that, in line with other Western economies and allied nations, there be a tangible form of recognition for the next of kin of those who have served in active service and made the ultimate sacrifice or been injured or wounded, whether physically or emotionally.

When we talk about these matters, this is not in any way to disparage the current system but to recognise that historically there was a time when a mothers medal was sent to the next of kin as listed in the enlistment papers of service personnel. That finished in September 1945. From that period of imperial medals, we then moved to Australian medals, and it's this scope that the tribunal has considered. The recommendations—if you will forgive me as I attempt to distil them—were that we should look at a medal directly for the next of kin and for anyone who is identified as next of kin—potentially more than one person—and that a next of kin medal be worn on the left by the genuine next of kin. Veterans' medals, as everyone would know, are worn on the right by their family members.

But the additional question is: can the medal order of wear clearly and tangibly demonstrate that this sacrifice has been made? At the moment, the medals represent the service given by the individual, but they don't recognise the sacrifice, and this comes in many different forms. A clasp, for those not initiated in these matters, is often a horizontal bar that appears on the cloth part of the medal. It is very tiny in some cases, but it is very noticeable and of extraordinary importance to those who understand the medal order of wear. The point of this clasp is to make it possible, when those medals are worn in perpetuity by family, to see at a single glance not only the service but the sacrifice. If you think about being at an RSL and approaching the families of veterans, the proposal is that, with one single glance, one can see that the sacrifice has been made, and an appropriate way of engaging or entering into a conversation with that family becomes all the more possible.

That's important because, if we look at the numbers of Australians who have been fallen or been injured or wounded, the numbers are extraordinary. Keep in mind that the recommendation goes back to September 1945. Few of us in this place or beyond these walls would know that 98.4 per cent of Australia's fallen fell before that date. They currently have imperial awards, for which the tribunal is unable to make a recommendation. It surprises me that there wasn't some recommendation to this effect. While it cannot formally be done, additional work can be done by this place to ensure there is continuity back to 1885, when the first person fell in the service of this country, in the Sudan.

If we think about the historical tale of Australia—from Sudan to the Boer War, to the trenches of World War I, to Beersheba, to the Rats of Tobruk, to Kokoda, to all the places of World War I's Western Front, to WWII service in the air, on water and on land—so many of these great historical battles are currently not able to be recognised with this clasp or medal, if we go ahead purely with this recommendation. This motion today contains a two-part recommendation—first of all, that we urge government and the entire community to look at the recommendations from 25 January and continue to be part of this consultation process. But with 98 per cent of our fallen holding imperial awards it's also important to recognise this may require an approach from this nation to Her Majesty for permission to include a clasp so we can treat all medals equally, back to the first fallen. I think it's incredibly important that we don't have clasps only for 1945 going forward.

Many have expressed views on the mothers medal. Sadly, as I understand, they were sent in the post office to be collected by next of kin. While that would seem an incredibly hardhearted instance for us now, that shows the reality of how things were at the time. Many families didn't appreciate the mothers medal as much as they should have. But one would also agree if we can start the medal from that moment forward there is no duplication, but it is the clasp that is important because that sits on the medals themselves.

This two-part recommendation of this motion is for everyone—not just this parliament, not just the veteran community. Remember, many of them made recommendations that may have differed quite significantly from what was recommended. We would ask those veterans to continue conversations in RSLs and with service personnel all around the country, on bases, here and overseas, because this is a very important step. It is incredibly important to finally capture, in a tangible sense, the full service and sacrifice of our service personnel. I'm utterly delighted that, finally, we have reached this stage. But it is not the end of the journey. There is still potentially 12 to 18 months of further conversation if and when this is to proceed.

It would be incomplete of me not to make a passing observation that, through the 15 years I've been involved in this campaign and the 25 years since Kay and Kerry Danes picked up this challenge, with 50,000 people filling out petitions, there was a decision to develop a pin for the three arms of the armed forces in place of the medal. This was an important step, but it is only halfway there, and these pins have been presented. But I'm disappointed that in many cases these pins may well have been an effort to stymie the ultimate campaign for appropriate medal recognition. These are strong words that I put today in this motion, but we worked extremely hard with chiefs of the Defence Force over this time, with varying levels of success, and these pins began being presented internally by Defence without notifying the government of the day. I think that's incredibly disappointing—that it was done by press release. It was only because I stumbled upon an inbox press release in the minister's office that I was able to notify the Prime Minister that these pins were being presented without the Prime Minister being aware. That was fixed within one hour, and the Prime Minister presented the pin that day.

This wasn't the greatest day in the history of this story, but, ultimately, I think the right thing happened. By supporting the recommendations of this report, we are allowing continued veteran contribution. I once again thank Kay and Kerry Danes and quote Kerry in particular, a 42-year Special Air Service Regiment veteran: 'I'm delighted with this recommendation from the tribunal. I feel we are very close now to a tangible result.' He, like all of us here, would thank every veteran family who, with the most painful memories of service in many cases, have made sure that, historically, not only service but sacrifice is appropriately recognised.

Comments

No comments