Luke Gosling (Solomon, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

At the heart of Australia's defence forces are the men and women who proudly wear the uniform, including my brother, who's serving in the Army in Timor-Leste at the moment. I send a cheerio to my brother Dan. Labor joins with the government in continuing to support all of our former and current defence personnel. In particular, I associate myself with the words that the Labor leader, the member for Grayndler, and the member for Wright said about my friend Mike Kelly, the former member for Eden-Monaro. Mike is a good man. Mike is a patriot and he will continue to work towards making our country more secure and more prosperous into the future. He's made a decision to do that outside of this place. I, for one, as a former serviceman, want to say thanks for your service, Mike. Thanks for your service in uniform and out of uniform, and I wish you well for the future, my friend.

Most of all, when it comes to looking after veterans, we're all in this together. We are supportive of the measures in the Defence Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous Measures) Bill 2020 because they will support our serving people. Transitioning out of the forces is a difficult time, and these superannuation and DHOAS, defence housing measures, will certainly aid in that transition. It will open up the superannuation scheme, ADF Super, so that ADF Super members who have left the ADF, if they have served for at least 12 months, can continue to use that super fund. We've all had that experience of trying to consolidate super funds. This will make it much easier for our serving people.

The purpose of the amendments in this bill is to make it absolutely clear that ADF members can choose to remain contributory members of ADF Super when they separate from the ADF. This change will be implemented through changes to the ADF Super trust deed which will take effect from 1 May 2020. I note the member for Shortland's comments about DFRDB and some of the issues there that we would like the government to have another look at. But this super change is a good one. When it comes to DHOAS, I know it has helped a lot of members of the Defence Force get into home ownership. This second measure in the bill expands access to DHOAS for members and veterans after they've completed their service. As I said, the transitionary period is an uncertain time. While former serving people may think they've stitched up some employment somewhere, that might change. Their family circumstances may change. So extending to five years the eligibility of those members is a very good thing. It will allow them to transition, to settle and to work out where they want to make that home ownership a reality, and it will allow the scheme to assist them and their family. The current two-year limitation is not always enough time to enable veterans and their families to make the best choices, so I support this measure.

As I said, transition to civilian life after the military can be quite difficult. I want to acknowledge the Minister for Veterans' Affairs, who is with us in the chamber, and the $5 million commitment to a wellbeing centre for Darwin and Palmerston. One of the things that centre will be able to do is assist members—whilst they're serving, as they transition and after they've completed their last day in uniform—to understand these bills and their effect on the policies of the Department of Veterans' Affairs. It will help with referrals to medical centres. It will provide information. It will connect people. It will provide a focus for our Top End community—a garrison town, as most members would know—to get the information that they need to access the support they need to make sure they are well and their families are well. I want to acknowledge that support, because we can't just hope that information on these changes to DHOAS and super is relayed to the soldier contemplating life after service; we need to be active. Through somewhere like the Darwin veteran wellbeing centre, that information will be imparted in a clear, supportive way, as will the range of services available to that young Australian.

I said that we and the government mostly see eye to eye. I want to draw the House's attention to something I learned overnight. A young Tasmanian man who signed up to serve our nation in World War II was in a naval vessel, HMAS Armidale, in the Timor Sea, north of Darwin. They were in the fight of their lives. Japanese aircraft were strafing the Armidale and had delivered bombs that would see the it go to the bottom of the Timor Sea. Teddy Sheean's mate was in the water. Teddy was wounded. He got up onto the deck of the Armidale and strapped himself into the gun. As the Japanese were flying overhead, firing at the Armidale and firing at his mates in the water, Teddy Sheean strapped himself into the gun and started taking down Japanese aircraft that were trying to kill his mates in the water. Teddy Sheean took his last breath and went down with the Armidale. Teddy Sheean, an 18-year-old young man from Tasmania, has a couple of times been considered by the Defence Honours and Awards Appeals Tribunal for the Victoria Cross. The honours and awards appeals tribunal has recommended that the government recommend to the sovereign that Teddy Sheean be awarded the Victoria Cross.

I remember the first time that I saw the famous painting of Teddy Sheean strapped into the gun, fighting with his last breath to protect his mates. I was in the War Memorial. I'll never forget it, because what it said to me very clearly was that that young Tasmanian serviceman, 18 years old, was prepared to go down with the ship to protect his mates in the water. The appeals tribunal has recommended that Teddy Sheean receive the Victoria Cross. He quite literally gave his life for his mates. But the government, for whatever reason, has said no. Teddy Sheean gave his life, at 18 years of age, to save his mates but doesn't get a Victoria Cross. I would like to hear from the Prime Minister why that is so. Would it be any different if he had been from Sydney? He was from Tasmania. Would it be any different if he'd had a parent who was connected? Would it be any different if that young man had had a different upbringing, in a different place, in a different time? I think it's shameful that the government has decided Teddy Sheean should not receive the Victoria Cross, and I ask the Prime Minister to explain why that is the case.

Finally, I would like to acknowledge the work of the Tasmanians—on both sides; it has bipartisan support—in the campaign to get Teddy Sheean properly recognised. I acknowledge Brian Mitchell, the member for Lyons, but, in a truly bipartisan way, I also want to acknowledge someone who is a former senator in the other place, the former Liberal senator Guy Barnett, for the work that he has done to get Teddy properly recognised. I hope all of that work doesn't go to waste and is not ignored, because this is an important issue. Let's think about those that we honour, and Teddy Sheean was certainly someone who deserved that honour.

See this speech in context