Warren Snowdon (Lingiari, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Defence Science and Personnel) Share this | Hansard source

I might make an observation about the member for Forrest. I wonder why she voted against the government’s stimulus package which put up $241.6 million for Defence Force housing. And why are opposition members in this place and in the Senate opposing this legislation? I note the member for Herbert is not in the House. I understand he is in his electorate in North Queensland dealing with issues to do with the floods. But he, amongst others in this chamber, voted against the government’s legislation to provide additional houses for Australian Defence Force personnel. So do not let us hear the member for Forrest and other members of the opposition come in here and say they support Australian Defence Force families when in fact they have voted against a provision which is explicitly designed to provide additional housing for Defence Force families. I will come to some other elements of the opposition’s contribution shortly.

In summing up the debate on the Defence Legislation (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill 2008, I want to begin by thanking all participants, including the member for Forrest and the shadow minister and everyone else in the chamber who spoke on the legislation, for their thoughtful comments and support for this very important legislation. I note that there will be differences, but I am encouraged by the fact that the opposition has seen fit to support this bill.

The bill makes amendments for three separate measures. The first amendment is to the Geneva Conventions Act 1957 to specifically incorporate a reference to and description of the red crystal emblem and reference to protocol III in part IV of the act, and to annex protocol III as the schedule to that act. The bill further requires amendments to the Criminal Code Act 1995 to specifically incorporate protocol III and the red crystal in the Dictionary to the Criminal Code and to ensure that the improper use of the red crystal is caught by the offence of improper use of the emblems of the Geneva conventions. The amendment also ensures that the new emblem is used only with the consent of the Minister for Defence.

The red crystal will be of significant benefit in combat zones in helping secure the safety of eligible humanitarian workers from all countries, regardless of their location or political situation and free of any implication of religious significance. Incorporation of protocol III will be consistent with Australia’s longstanding support for the Geneva conventions and their additional protocols. The new emblem is unlikely to be used in Australia for either indicative or protective purposes, given the longstanding recognition accorded to the red cross emblem. The new emblem may, however, be used by the Australian Defence Force in certain regions overseas. Incorporation would further demonstrate and enhance Australia’s credentials in international humanitarian law. It would also enable Australia to encourage states not yet a party to the protocol to ratify it both within our region and beyond.

The second amendment relates to the Defence Act 1903 to explicitly enable the making of regulations to cover the provision of medical and dental treatment, including pharmaceuticals, to an Australian Defence Force member or cadet or a member of the family of an Australian Defence Force member. The amendments to section 124 of the act enable a more comprehensive regime in the Defence Force regulations. The amendments will broaden the regulation-making power to enable the making of regulations to cover the provision of medical and dental treatment, including pharmaceuticals, to an Australian Defence Force member or cadet or a member of the family of an Australian Defence Force member.

In relation to pharmaceuticals, it is intended that the regulations will cover the possession, storage, supply, dispensing and administration of scheduled pharmaceuticals by Australian Defence Force pharmacists, medics, nurses and civilian health professionals engaged by the Australian Defence Force. The effect of the amendments will be to create a regime that would ensure that the Australian Defence Force and its members are not hindered in the uniform application of their duties, here and overseas, by competing state and territory laws and will allow the proper embedding of uniform standards and procedures across the Australian Defence Force.

The third issue covered in this bill relates to the Defence (Special Undertakings) Act 1952 to explicitly provide that the joint defence facility Pine Gap is a special defence undertaking and a prohibited area, with the insertion of a purposive clause to make it clear that the defence power is not the only constitutional basis relied upon to support the act.

These protections are essential to a facility of such sensitivity and importance to Australia’s defence and external relations to deter mischief makers and those with more sinister intent. The importance of this facility I am sure is well understood by those on both sides of this House. The consequences of damage or disruption are grave both in terms of our defence and that of our principal ally, the United States. As such, it would adversely affect our external relations with that country.

I once again thank honourable members for their examination of and comments on this bill. I commend it to the House. Before I conclude I want to make some observations about contributions made by members opposite—including the member for Forrest, who scurried out very quickly—in relation to this commitment made at the last election:

A Rudd Labor Government will progressively extend free health care currently provided to ADF personnel to ADF dependent spouses and children.

This is not a policy that was previously undertaken, advocated or understood by the opposition. It is not something that they went to the last election with. They did nothing about it for the 11 years they were in government. As befits our proposal, announced in the 2008-09 budget and consistent with our policy, we are initiating a pilot of free health care in the regional and remote locations of Singleton, Cairns, Katherine, Sale and the Karratha-Pilbara region. This first stage, which will commence in May this year, will cost $12.2 million over four years. In recognition of our desire to look at other opportunities, in October last year the government announced stage 2, which sees expansion of the trial to Townsville, Darwin and Puckapunyal. This means that we will be helping 16,000 spouses and children through the trial. This second stage will cost an additional $14.4 million in its first year and will commence in the second half of 2009.

I want to make it very clear that we are committed to this initiative. We have made certain that we will use an approach that looks at developing the best possible way and the most appropriate way of providing these services to Australian Defence Force families. I would ask the opposition that, when they are making observations and commenting about this, at least be factually accurate and understand the intent of what we are trying to do, and perhaps even support the intent of what we are trying to do rather than try to take cheap shots in the way in which they have done this evening in this debate. I understand, despite the rhetoric I used previously, that all sides of this House support the Australian Defence Force, and it is important that we work together to make sure they have the best possible conditions. It is important that we work to make sure that Australian Defence Force families are treated well and we know and believe that the extension of these trials will not only be of great benefit to Australian Defence Force families, but will be supported by them. I commend the legislation to the House.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

See this speech in context