Brett Raguse (Forde, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

When I was last talking about the importance of the Military Memorials of National Significance Bill 2008, particularly for my seat of Forde, I was discussing the significance of Camp Cable, which was established during the Second World War. It housed about 20,000 American troops. Camp Cable, as I explained previously, was located between Jimboomba and Logan Village. During the war, from 1942 to 1943, it housed about 20,000 American troops as part of the staging for the Battle of the Coral Sea off North Queensland. My point was about the need to enshrine our memorials. This bill certainly goes a long way towards establishing a process to allow communities across the country to give recognition to that visual history.

I also mentioned my childhood in a family that had a very strong military background. We very quickly lose that verbal history and that living history. My father tragically died 20-odd years ago. I remember the discussions that we had when I was a child about his experiences and the experiences of the region. He was a farm boy from Teviotville, which is just outside the electorate I represent. During the 1940s there was a mobilisation in the township of Beaudesert, which is also a part of my electorate, which established the 2nd/14th Light Horse Regiment. He was a young man of 18. He and his brother were asked to bring their horses along and they mobilised the 2nd/14th. Obviously, the technology of war at that stage meant that the 2nd/14th, or the light horse brigades, were converted into other divisions and it became part of an armoured division. The people of Beaudesert these days probably are not even aware of that history, so it is important that we consider ways of ensuring that we maintain an understanding, and I believe that this bill goes some way towards that.

I was talking briefly about Canungra, which is a major military facility in my electorate as well. It is otherwise known as Kokoda Barracks within the Canungra military area. It was established during World War II and was revived during the 1960s until the end of the Vietnam War. The base provides a substantial permanent resident population as well as an ever-changing transient population due to the extensive ongoing training courses on offer at the base. In fact, the member for Eden-Monaro, the Hon. Dr Mike Kelly, did his initial training there and I believe that in subsequent years he has spent a lot of time at Canungra. It is very much for people who have served in the military. To some degree it has become almost a pilgrimage for them to return to Canungra. It has a significant history for a whole range of reasons, including the land warfare training done during the Vietnam War era and, in subsequent years, for other purposes.

I wanted to make note of this particularly because Canungra is obviously a well-known area now but in years to come, given the change that may occur, we may forget a lot about its history. It is so important, in fact, that it was recognised in a very famous song that many of you would know. It is a song by Redgum called I was only 19. Mr Speaker, I would like to seek your indulgence because I want to talk a little bit about the words in this song, but the only way to do that is to put it to tune. I would like to give you a little bit of an understanding of the importance of this song. It goes something like this:

Mum and dad and Denny saw the passing out parade at Puckapunyal.

It was a long march from cadets.

The sixth Battalion was the next to tour and it was me who drew the card.

We did Canungra and Shoalwater before we left.

I have put it to tune because people know that song very well. Without the reference to Canungra in that song, it could well have been forgotten.

Michael Johnson (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Johnson interjecting

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister Assisting the Shadow Minister for Immigration and Citizenship) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He did not pick up the tune.

Brett Raguse (Forde, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Oh, he did not? I tried to sing the Redgum version. It is a very famous Redgum song. I can sing it again, but not today.

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister Assisting the Shadow Minister for Immigration and Citizenship) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Maybe at 11 o’clock at night after a few drinks.

Brett Raguse (Forde, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, point taken. I should say that the area has some significance because adjacent to the area of Canungra, Jimboomba and Logan Village is Beenleigh. Beenleigh was also an area of training during the Second World War. On that point, the town of Beenleigh has a school called St Joseph’s Tobruk Memorial School. It celebrated 50 years in 2003. Many are still not aware of its history, and it is rather significant. There was a parish priest, Father Owen Steele, who later became Monsignor Steele, in that diocese and it was from him that the school gained its title, Tobruk Memorial. During the North Africa campaign, Father Owen Steele became one of the famous ‘Rats of Tobruk’. On his return to Australia in 1943, Archbishop Duhig appointed him as parish priest of Beaudesert. St Joseph’s was built in memory of the men who served at Tobruk, and its history is well known today. Some of the remaining ‘Rats of Tobruk’ who are a part of the Beenleigh RSL at Mount Warren Park continue to involve themselves in that particular school and do a lot of fundraising. It is a memorial of significance, but under its current state, unless we are able to bring that into legislation, it may well be a school that will be lost to history in later years.

We understand, of course, that memorials are more than just bricks and mortar or glass and steel. I remember that as a child many of the memorials I saw around our district were made of timber. I presume that a lot of them just no longer exist. It is important, again, that we ensure that we can somehow give significance to these areas. These memorials are important because they are about people, their families and their descendants. Our nation pays tribute to and commemorates these men and women who have served and particularly those who have made the supreme sacrifice. We put a lot of effort into our commemoration of these events and so we should not forget—in fact, we will not forget. I think this bill will take us some way to being able to ensure that.

I also want to pay tribute to the veterans organisations in my electorate and those men and women who give generously of their time in both voluntary and other capacities: the Beenleigh Logan Village and Jimboomba RSL and the VASA organisation based in Jimboomba, who specifically looked after Vietnam veterans but have now widened that service. I have previously mentioned in the House that they do a lot of work to support current veterans and their families. I would also like to mention the current RSL president in Beaudesert and the committee chair, Errol Guilfoyle and Dave Ardrey respectively, who have worked very hard in our community to ensure that the veterans are looked after and that we do not forget the sacrifices made. I also pay tribute to the RSL ‘girl in a million’ from Beaudesert, Jessica Brown, who recently went through a whole range of fundraisers. The funds from the ‘girl in a million’ quest essentially go to supporting veterans and their families.

Adjacent to the area of Canungra, which I spoke about a minute ago, is an area called Camp Tabragalba. It was a very famous area that has somehow been lost in time. It was originally a site for training, including for the ‘Z’ force, who I believe were part of the liberation forces in Singapore in the Second World War. This site has almost been forgotten and until very recently it was listed as a possible site for a water storage facility in that region. Because of that, the site has been left unmaintained and today it is a series of very old, dilapidated—but historically significant—buildings. I am pleased to say that a private investor who has bought an adjoining property, a fellow called Steven Searle, has become a benevolent protector of this military history and has begun establishing on the neighbouring property what I believe will be a world-class air and military collection. This is to preserve our military history, which will include the old Camp Tabragalba. I was talking to the Hon. Mike Kelly about this the other day. He is aware of Camp Tabragalba and its significance and was interested in knowing a little bit more about how we might put some investment into that area. It is conceivable that legislation allowing the national recognition of historic memorial sites will further encourage private investment like that of Steve Searle’s and his aptly named Wirraway property. Further down the road is the Beaudesert township, which, as I said before, saw the major mobilisation of the 2nd/14th in the Second World War. I think it is something we need to give significant recognition to.

Because there is no memorial of this event, it is probably an indication of how history can easily be lost when, as I said before, those World War I veterans and their living history are now no longer with us. While we have captured a lot of that history, the fact is that we no longer have those people in our presence, and they will be followed by the World War II veterans. There are far, far fewer of them. In fact, my mother, as I mentioned previously, was in the WAAAF, the women’s air force. She was a spotter-plotter for the Battle of the Coral Sea in Townsville. In fact, she was there during the bombing. She has her recollection—at 87 years of age she has a very good memory—but while I remember the stories, and we have recorded them to some degree, it is important that we do not forget to record that verbal history. I believe these memorials of significance will mean that we can have a visual history that is maintained. As I said, this is about preserving our military history. Once that history is gone, it is lost forever and future generations will lose that military history. Lest we forget. I commend this bill to the House.

Michael Johnson (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise in the parliament today to speak on the Military Memorials of National Significance Bill 2008. Let me say at the outset that, as the son and the grandson of two men who have worn the uniforms of their respective countries in different eras and different theatres, in the execution of my duties as the federal member for Ryan and as a member of the Australian parliament I will always have a special commitment to the interests and welfare of serving and former members of the Australian Defence Force. I want to take the opportunity to thank all those in the Ryan electorate, which I have the great honour of representing in this parliament, who give generously of their time to honour the memory and deeds of all those who have served our country.

This bill provides a mechanism that seeks to permit memorials outside this nation’s Capital Territory to be recognised as military memorials of national significance. This bill specifically has in mind the Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial in Ballarat. The memorial, which was completed in 2004, is etched with the names of more than 35,000 Australian prisoners of war, from the Boer War through to the Korean War. Initially, it was the election commitment of Mr Rudd that the memorial in Ballarat be recognised formally as a national memorial. But, despite the character and theme of this memorial, which would otherwise satisfy the current criteria applicable to the ACT, it is not currently recognised as a national memorial. I should say that this bill still does not allow for the memorial to be given national memorial status. So, interestingly, the bill goes against the grain of the Rudd Labor government’s election commitment made last November.

As the Liberal federal member for Ryan, I am certainly not going to let the Rudd Labor government and the Australian Labor Party get away with misrepresenting to the constituents of Ryan the commitments and the great work of the Howard government when it came to the construction and maintenance of our war memorials, and especially the Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial in Ballarat. The people of Ryan, and especially the veterans of Ryan and the members of the various RSL sub-branches in Ryan, would expect me to accurately record the Howard government’s policy. The former Howard government and previous Howard government ministers were strong advocates of the Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial in Ballarat, and this was demonstrated by that government’s allocation of some half a million dollars to the memorial, which is the largest federal government grant allocated to a memorial outside of Canberra.

As I say, at the last election Mr Rudd promised the people of Ballarat and those interested in this issue that, if elected, he would formally recognise the Ballarat memorial as a national war memorial. Let me quote the words of Mr Rudd. I know that the people of Ryan will certainly be interested in this because they have a great interest in the performance of the Labor government. I am sure that anybody listening to this debate in the Ryan electorate will be particularly keen to know of the clear inconsistency that will be highlighted. Mr Rudd, when he was interviewed on radio 3BA, said:

And I think it’s entirely appropriate that this community—

that is, the Ballarat community—

has put together a memorial for them. If we form the next government, I will move anything necessary to ensure that this is properly recognised as a national war memorial.

In being critical of the Howard government, Mr Rudd stated:

Mr Howard and his Minister think that the only national memorials that can exist for the war have to be in Canberra. Now, if that is true, if that is actually their view, I just don’t agree with it.

Given that this bill does nothing of the kind, it is yet another crystal clear example of the behaviour of the new Prime Minister and his government, who simply cannot keep their promises. They reach for the moon but are unable to deliver. Simply put, it is a broken election promise and another attempt to deceive the wider public and certainly the people of Ryan.

If this bill does not in fact make the Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial in Ballarat a national memorial, then one might ask: what does it do? Quite simply, what the government has done in a very cunning way is to introduce an entire new category and label it ‘military memorials of national significance’. This is very different from declaring memorials as national memorials. This is the fundamental point that I wish to raise in this parliament and which I wish to draw to the attention of the constituents of Ryan. The public needs to be made aware of this, because Mr Rudd is clearly being very mischievous. At the election he said one thing and now in government he is clearly doing something else.

The fact is that the National Memorials Ordinance provides that national memorials can only be located within the boundaries of the ACT. Whilst the Labor Party, throughout the time they were in opposition, strongly argued that there was no legal impediment to declaring the Ballarat prisoner of war memorial a national memorial, as brightly as the sun shines in our Australian skies the introduction of this bill now demonstrates that the Rudd Labor government clearly agrees with the previous position of the Howard government—that is, that it is not possible to make memorials outside of the ACT. Just as an election commitment is easily made, so too is it easily broken by this new Prime Minister. But as the member for Ryan I will continue to shine a very bright torch on the Rudd Labor government’s modus operandi. It is clearly unacceptable that a commitment is made at the election for something that is pretty black and white and yet, when it comes to being in government, there is a very different course of action. Indeed, there is a certain pattern of political behaviour starting to creep into this government and to become very clear to the people of the Ryan electorate, which, as I say, I have the great honour of representing here in the national parliament.

In the context of this bill, I would like to draw to the attention of the Speaker, the government, the Prime Minister and particularly the Minister for Veterans’ Affairs the great story of a gentleman by the name of Mick Dennis. I am sure that most if not all of my colleagues in this parliament would be very keen to honour those Australians who have worn the uniform and shown their remarkable spirit of courage and determination in great adversity.

I also want to draw to the attention of the parliament a book called The Guns of Muschu. It was written by Don Dennis, a Vietnam veteran. Don’s son has worn the Australian uniform and has served in Iraq. But of relevance here is that Don Dennis is the nephew of Mick Dennis, an incredible Australian who served in World War II but whose name very few Australians would know. Mick Dennis was part of a special and highly secretive intelligence operation with seven other highly trained commando colleagues in Papua New Guinea that went tragically and horribly wrong. I would like to read into the Hansard from the back cover of this book, The Guns of Muschu. I thank the Parliamentary Library for their wonderful work in making the book available to me. It is not actually available in our library so, with great diligence, they managed to get it to my office on loan from the National Library of Australia. For those of my colleagues, particularly the newer members of this parliament who do not use the services of our Parliamentary Library, let me say that it is a wonderful repository of resources for our work.

I quote from the back cover of The Guns of Muschu:

During the night of 11 April 1945, eight Australian Z Special commandos landed on Japanese-held Muschu Island, off the coast of New Guinea. Their mission was to reconnoitre the island’s defences and confirm the location of two concealed naval guns that commanded the approaches to Wewak Harbour.

But the secret mission went horribly wrong. Unknown to the commandos, their presence had been discovered within hours of their landing. With no means of escape, the island became a killing ground.

Nine days later, on the New Guinea mainland, the only survivor staggered back through the Japanese lines to safety...

This is the remarkable true story of that survivor.

That survivor is Mick Dennis, and his nephew, Don Dennis, wrote this book, The Guns of Muschu. Anyone who is interested in Australian military history must read this book. It is a story of rare courage and fortitude. It is a story of a man’s determination to survive in surroundings that must have been terrifying and which few people would survive.

The story of Mick Dennis came to my attention via my father, who has actually seen the guns of Muschu. I have taken an interest in how we can honour Mick Dennis’s courage and his remarkable survival. The book reports that the guns are still in remarkably good condition. I have taken an interest because I grew up in Wewak in Papua New Guinea. I was never aware of the guns of Muschu but I certainly hope that one day I can see them for myself. My fervent hope is that Mick Dennis, who is now in his 90s, has a chance to see the guns of Muschu in his lifetime. I hope that the man who was sent to confirm their location more than six decades ago—but never saw them and lost his seven commando colleagues in the raid—can one day see them with his own eyes.

In the context of this bill, I want to ask the Rudd government to honour Mick Dennis’s courage in some way. I will be writing to the Prime Minister and the Minister for Veterans’ Affairs to see if the federal government can invest in a plaque or something similarly appropriate that honours the courage and commitment of Mick Dennis. We should do this because it is the right thing to do.

I would like the Rudd government to consider discussions with the government of Papua New Guinea to see if we can construct a memorial on Muschu Island. With the guns still there, I am sure the locals would be pleased. It could become a tourist attraction and generate a revenue stream for the locals in much the same way as the Kokoda Trail does for Papua New Guinea. The Kokoda Trail has become something of an iconic place to visit for Australians with a deep interest in Australian military history and a wish to honour those Australians who served in PNG.

Mick Dennis is still alive and I look forward very much to the deep honour of meeting him and also his nephew, Don Dennis, who wrote this book. I want to read a passage from The Guns of Muschu that really gives a flavour of the terror and the feeling that he must have had when he was swimming from Muschu Island to the mainland of New Guinea to survive. It is a remarkable story and I encourage all those who might have a little bit of time to read as much as they can of this book or certainly to read passages from it. I quote from page 158 of the book, which describes the beginning of Mick Dennis’s swim from Muschu Island to the mainland of New Guinea:

Removing his trousers, he stuffed them with his boots, weapon and ammunition, then bound them to the plank with vines. Pushing the plank out into deep water, he crawled onto it and used his arms to paddle out into the lagoon.

Although there was only a partial moon, it was very bright. As he stroked away from shore, he expected any moment to hear the zip of bullets around him. But none came, and he soon reached the reef. There was only a low swell and he crossed it without trouble, then headed out into deep water. Breathing easier now, he checked his course by the moon, set himself into a steady rhythm and began the long paddle towards the mainland.

From page 162:

Dennis was two hours into the crossing when the first shark came. He was paddling through calm water alive with phosphorescence, every stroke leaving a fiery trail that flamed and sparkled with blue-green light. He heard splashing behind him, then the hiss of a fin cutting through the water. The shark swept past his right side, trailing phosphorescence, then arced around and headed back towards him. Dennis stopped paddling, raised his arms out of the water and tried to keep his balance as the shark streaked past his left side like a glowing torpedo. It then slowly circled.

For what seemed an eternity the shark cruised around, approaching close, then suddenly turning about as if taunting him. Finally it lost interest and swam lazily away.

Then from page 163:

Dennis could see down into the black water, where deep below fish—or sharks—were leaving trails like meteors in the sky. In some ways this was even more frightening than coming face to face with a shark ...

After another hour, a rain squall hit lashing the water, driving waves that broke over him and threatened to wash him off his plank ... Dennis resumed paddling, judging direction by the moon and straining to see the mainland. However, he’d lost all sense of time and had no idea where he was.

Still the shapes swam past him, below him, around him. It took every ounce of strength to keep going, making one stroke after another ...

The Guns of Muschu is a book that records the remarkable, rare determination of an Australian to survive in adversity that very few—I suspect none in this parliament—could contemplate. It is the story of an Australian soldier, but very few Australians would know his name. In his 90s now, I think the time has come for the Australian government to recognise and acknowledge him. I regret very much that the former Howard government did not do that. In my case, I had no idea of Mick Dennis’s existence, but now that I do I will write to the Prime Minister. I ask for the support of not only my colleagues in the coalition but also colleagues from the government who have a particular interest in this area.

For those who might be interested, the landings at Wewak that went ahead in May 1945 showed just how skilful, courageous and special our Australians were because, in that battle at Wewak, 451 Australians were killed and 1,163 were wounded while by comparison 7,200 Japanese died in the campaign. That is a remarkable difference in statistics, with over 7,000 Japanese dying compared to 451 Australians in the battle for Wewak.

To end my remarks on this bill, memories have made The Guns of Muschu an important historical document as well as a very human story of courage, sacrifice, resourcefulness, luck, sadness and recovery. I want to place on the record my strong commitment to all those in this country who have worn the uniform. Especially as the member for Ryan I want to place on record the very deep appreciation I have for members of the RSL sub-branches who do all they can to honour the sacrifices of those who have served in theatres throughout the world both in this century and in the past. Australians must be very mindful of the great responsibility that we have in this generation to honour those who have fought in the name of freedom, in the name of democracy, in the name of Australia and under the flag of Australia.

Certainly, in Ryan all the RSL sub-branches work very closely with the community and they receive remarkable support at times like Anzac Day and Remembrance Day when their voluntary deeds come to the fore. In conclusion, I want to thank the sub-branches which this year on Anzac Day organised very special services yet again, and to thank all those from the Ryan communities that went out to the various services, particularly the dawn service in Bellbowrie, which I attended. The Kenmore Moggill sub-branch of the RSL put that together with great skill and great pride. In the parliament, I honour all those who have worn the uniform in Ryan and particularly the families of those who have served our country.

Daryl Melham (Banks, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Military Memorials of National Significance Bill 2008 provides the mechanism that will enable a memorial built outside the ACT, and which meets specific criteria, to be recognised as a military memorial of national significance. I commend the minister for this initiative, which allows the recognition of national memorials to be established outside the capital city. At the same time I note the very specific criteria the minister has included in the bill. These criteria are important for future applications for national recognition, not to exclude memorials to our war veterans but to ensure that those which are included are worthy of the honour of the title ‘national’.

The genesis of this legislation was from activity in the city of Ballarat. The Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial was completed and dedicated on 6 February 2004. This memorial has inscribed on it the names of the 34,737 Australian prisoners of war. These are the names of the POWs who served Australia from the Anglo-Boer War, through the two World Wars and up to the Korean War, noting that there were no Australian POWs during the period of the Vietnam War. Also included at the memorial are the names of the 8,600 POWs who died in the various camps from brutality, starvation and disease. There are another 4,000 names of those for whom there are no known graves.

I am advised that the memorial itself consists of a pathway symbolising the journey of the POW. In the Botanical Gardens in Ballarat, a pathway has been created which is long and straight and interspersed with shapes like railway sleepers, symbolising the Thai-Burma Railway. Parallel to the pathway is a polished black granite wall which is 130 metres long. In a reflective pool are basalt obelisks up to 4.5 metres high, with the names of all the prisoner-of-war camps. One of the obelisks is fallen, symbolising those POWs who did not return home. The Ballarat memorial was built because of the dedication of the Ballarat RSL sub-branch, the Ex-Prisoner of War Association and the people of Ballarat. It is a tribute to their perseverance and hard work that the memorial was built, and I congratulate them on their achievement.

Those responsible for building the memorial were careful that this one should not detract from the Changi Chapel in the national capital. They were, however, concerned that there be a memorial to all Australians held captive in wartime, not just those from Ballarat. Dare I say it, Mr Deputy Speaker, but isn’t that what building a memorial is all about? It should not be about every man and his dog thinking that a memorial is a good idea and then jumping on the bandwagon to get government grants, and away you go. No, it must be more than that, as we have clearly seen demonstrated in Ballarat. The project took many people 10 years and an extraordinary community effort to finalise. This memorial stands in Ballarat today not because somebody thought it was a good idea at the time but because the veterans community and the local Ballarat community passionately believed in the need to establish such a memorial. Moreover, the community was prepared to work together over a long period of time to make it happen because they thought it important: a memorial which, apart from other factors, actually contained the names of all those men and women who were prisoners of war, as well as including those from all the conflicts where Australians were taken as prisoners of war.

This government has taken the first important step in allowing for such memorials to be called national memorials. I am sure that the minister and the member for Ballarat must be elated that this has finally come to pass through their representations and decision making. At the same time it is important that we are very clear as to the criteria which will be applied to future such memorials. I think it right that the process not be effortless. If it is easy, it would disrespect the people whom the memorials are built to remember, as well as the people who made it happen.

The explanatory memorandum to the bill details clause 4(3), which specifies the criteria for any memorial to be declared a military memorial of national significance. The memorial must be of a scale, design and standard appropriate for such a memorial; be dignified, in keeping with its purpose and standing as a war memorial; commemorate Australian military involvement in a significant aspect of Australia’s wartime history, and the commemoration of that involvement must be the sole purpose of the memorial; have a major role in community commemorations; observe Commonwealth flag protocols; be owned or managed by a state or Northern Territory authority, and that authority must be responsible for the ongoing maintenance of the memorial, including financial responsibility; comply with applicable planning, construction and related requirements; be located on public land within a state or the Northern Territory; be publicly accessible, and entry must be free; be constructed and functioning as a memorial; and not be associated with a commercial function that conflicts with its purpose. These criteria are reasonable and entirely suitable for the purposes that have been determined, and I am confident that most veterans would agree with me.

The minister has made it very clear that any ongoing maintenance or refurbishment is the responsibility of the authority that owns or manages it. A further measure within the legislation provides that the minister is able to revoke a declaration should a memorial cease to meet the legislated requirements. It is not easy to establish a national memorial, nor should it be. When in opposition, the government promised that this step would be taken—that legislation would be introduced to allow for national war memorials outside the ACT. So we continue the process of delivering what we promised.

The issue of war memorials brings to mind a recent visit to an overseas memorial made by one of my constituents. He was part of a representative veterans group present at the dedication of the Park of the Australian Soldier and the unveiling of the Australian Light Horse Memorial in Be’er Sheva, in Israel. This memorial commemorates the famous charge on Beersheba, as it was then known, of Australian Light Horsemen. The units involved were the New South Wales 12th Light Horse Regiment and the 4th Light Horse Regiment from Victoria. The park was funded through a private donation, with contributions by both the Australian and Israeli governments and the local council.

The history of the charge at Beersheba is breathtaking in its audacity. According to the official history, written by HS Gullett:

From the crest of the ridge Beersheba was in full view, four miles away to the north-west. The course of the Australians lay down a long, slight slope broken occasionally by tracks cut by heavy rains, but bare of growth or other cover. Somewhere between them and the town lay a system of enemy trenches.

…            …            …

At 4.30 the two regiments moved off at the trot, deploying at once until there was a space of five yards between the horsemen. Surprise and speed were their one chance, and almost at once the pace was quickened to a gallop.

…            …            …

After going nearly two miles, hot machine-gun fire was directed against the leading squadrons …

…            …            …

Many horses in the leading line were hit and dropped, but there was no check to the charge ... These Australian countrymen had never in all their riding at home ridden a race like this; and all ranks, from the heroic ground scouts galloping in front of the squadron leaders, to the men in the third line, drove in their spurs and charged on Beersheba.

The action, as we know, was successful, and Beersheba, with its critical water wells, was taken. This successful charge is perhaps not so well known as other actions of the First World War, but it is one of the most significant, both in the boldness of the charge itself and in the impact it had on the direction of the war in the Middle East thereafter.

Among the Australians invited to attend the dedication of the park and the unveiling of the memorial were seven former light horsemen from the Second World War. There are no survivors now alive from the First World War. Two of these men had relatives who participated in the charge across the desert on 31 October 1917. The ceremony occurred on 28 April at Be’er Sheva, now in Israel. The park was dedicated by the Governor-General of Australia and the President of Israel in the presence of the Minister for Veterans’ Affairs, the Hon. Alan Griffin. The members for Mackellar and North Sydney were also present. I understand that the grandfather of the member for North Sydney was appointed by the occupying British force to supervise the rebuilding of Beersheba. Reports of the ceremony indicate that the Israeli President was fulsome in his praise of Australia and Australians. The centrepiece of the memorial park is a memorial sculpture of a light horseman leaping the trenches during the charge on Beersheba held by the Turkish. The fact that Australia now enjoys such warm relations with Turkey is proof, if any were needed, that the lives forfeited on that day on both sides were not in vain.

There are 773 Australian war dead commemorated in Israel: 544 from the First World War and 229 from the Second World War. The Commonwealth War Graves Commission maintains the nearby Beersheba War Cemetery, which contains 1,241 graves of the First World War, of whom 175 are of Australians. I would like to take a moment to consider the issue of the maintenance of war memorials and war graves. The charter of the Commonwealth War Graves Commission is to mark and maintain the memorials of the Commonwealth war dead, including Australians. The Office of Australian War Graves, on behalf of the Commonwealth commission, maintains CWGC cemeteries and memorials in Australia, Papua New Guinea, the Solomon Islands and Norfolk Island. Official overseas war memorials are the responsibility of the Office of Australian War Graves. These are maintained on a regular basis, and a program of specific works is drawn up annually to identify projects.

There are many privately constructed memorials to Australians overseas, and maintenance is the responsibility of those who constructed them. In some very specific cases, some government grants are available to assist with their restoration and preservation. Generally these funds apply to those overseas privately constructed war memorials where Australian veterans, military associations or other associations recognising the contribution of Australian service personnel have some involvement. My understanding is that the Australian Light Horse Memorial at Be’er Sheva is covered under the Office of Australian War Graves Overseas Privately Constructed Memorial Restoration Program. This contribution by the Australian government is for the maintenance of the actual monument itself, not the works associated with the Park of the Australian Soldier in which the monument stands.

I commend the Bill to the House. I know that in effect it is supported by all sides of the House. These are issues that rise above politics. We play our political games at times, but not in relation to this. We honour our war dead. These memorials need to be preserved, protected and, when appropriate, erected so that we never forget the sacrifices that have been made that allow us to conduct the democracy that we have today.

Sharman Stone (Murray, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Environment, Heritage, the Arts and Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to also support the Military Memorials of National Significance Bill 2008. This bill is being introduced in order to overcome a problem for the Labor government. The member for Ballarat, in the lead-up to the election, promised that the new Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial in that very fine city would be designated a national war memorial, with the expectation of the funds from the Commonwealth which flow from such a designation. Unfortunately, of course, under current legislation the Ballarat POW memorial would not have been listed as promised because the National Memorials Ordinance 1928 quite categorically requires a memorial to be located in the Australian Capital Territory. Therefore, this bill creates a new category of memorial.

There is in fact a national POW memorial in Canberra: the Changi Chapel at the Royal Military College, Duntroon. It is the original chapel from Singapore, and as such is a very poignant and fitting memorial to those extraordinary 22,376 Australian POWs who were captured by the Japanese in the Second World War. While 8,031 of those POWs were worked and starved to death, all of them suffered unimaginable horrors. The RMC Duntroon memorial is a superb and important place for remembering the dead and those who suffered. However, it is not readily accessible to all of the Australian public, so it was a very important thing that the Ballarat veterans community did when it created a memorial which covers all conflicts involving Australian forces, from the Boer War through to the 21st century. It is a very commendable achievement of a group consisting largely of volunteers from the Ballarat veterans community. They were supported, of course, with over half a million dollars in funding from the John Howard led coalition government, and we were very pleased to contribute that funding for such a very worthy and nationally significant cause.

It is therefore a shame that not all of the expectations of these Ballarat veterans have been met through this bill. If the Ballarat POW memorial had been designated a national memorial, as originally promised by the Labor member, it would also have attracted the federal funding for maintenance and the ongoing relevant costs of ensuring that the memorial was there for all time. This legislation creates a new category of memorial, to be called a military memorial of national significance. This might sound to the politically naive like the same thing as a national memorial, but in fact this legislation creates a new class of memorial. Such a memorial needs to be purpose-built or exclusively dedicated to the memory of our veterans and service men and women, and does not necessarily have to be in Canberra. Most significantly, in this bill there is absolutely no funding that will go along with the new designation. This funding must come from another source. It is suggested in the bill that it is most likely that a memorial that receives this new designation will be owned by a state government or a local government authority and they will be responsible for the funding. There is to be absolutely no way that a new memorial so designated by this new bill will be given federal funding. I think that that is sure to be a disappointment to those in Ballarat who hoped—indeed, expected—that their memorial was of sufficient significance that, along with the special designation, there would be maintenance by all Australians through appropriate funding from the Commonwealth government. This is not the purpose of the bill, and this is not going to be the case when this bill is passed.

So I hope that the people of Ballarat who worked so hard to create this POW memorial and to obtain the $500,000 in funding from the John Howard government will not feel let down, because let me assure you it is a magnificent memorial. As a daughter of a POW from the Second World War, I particularly appreciate it, although there were indeed some problems with the way the names were collected to put on that memorial. It was done by very worthy volunteers, and I suppose it was to be expected that there would be some omissions. In the case of my father, he went to look at the memorial not just expecting to see his name as a POW of the Germans, having been shot down over Germany as part of the RAF Bomber Command, but even more hoping to see the names of his fellows in the crew—the Australians—who died as POWs, with the exception of one of the crew members, Jim Coitties, who lives on in Sydney. The rest of his crew were killed after being captured, taken to a German prisoner of war camp and then, a short time later, released to a civilian mob who hacked them to pieces. That led to a war crimes tribunal hearing and, after the war, there was appropriate dealing with those who let those Australian POWs in my father’s crew out of the POW camp and into the hands of a maddened mob where they were, within a short time, killed and buried in the gardens, still in their uniforms and with their identification. Later they were disinterred and reburied in an appropriate place in Germany. My father was devastated to find none of the names of those Australians on the POW memorial; their names had been forgotten. I commend the veterans of Ballarat who shared the concern, not just for people like my father but for many other POWs and mates whose names were accidentally omitted.

So, at the end of the list of names in alphabetical order on the Ballarat memorial, there is another list of the forgotten. Descendants therefore may never find those added names—after all, there are over 35,000 names in total on this memorial. You would presume that the descendants in years to come will go to the alphabetical listings and they will not find their grandparents, great-grandparents or fathers on that list. Let me put on the record that I appreciate that the volunteers who put together this memorial felt very sorry about the omissions when putting down the names of the POWs. I appreciate the incredibly hard task it was to include everybody.

Australians in fact suffered horrific POW numbers in the Second World War, in particular. The First World War was a war where the courage of Australians was established and the reputation of the young nation was forged on the battlefields, beginning in Gallipoli and then on the Western Front, in Belgium and in France. Australians had the most horrific experience, particularly the AIF as they suffered in the trenches. We remember their courage and determination, their comradeship, their creativity and their make-do attitude when they often did not have adequate weaponry and did not even have adequate uniforms. All of those characteristics forged the reputation of this great nation as a people willing to give their all at a time of great disaster.

In the Second World War it was very often the sons and daughters of those First World War diggers or their close family relations who served. They forged a different understanding about the character of Australia. This was very much through the POWs’ absolute tenacity, their love for one another, their caring attitude and their sheer determination to live. There was the most horrific experience of the Japanese POWs in the Second World War. Who will ever forget the death marches of Sandakan, where there were in fact just six survivors of the two death marches. The British and Australians, some 2,500, in 1945 were forced to march to Ranau and only six of those 2,500 survived. I am very pleased that the Howard government established memorials at Sandakan in Malaysia, and of course we now have memorials to the POWs at Hellfire Pass in Thailand. I hope that, as the years go by, young Australians will be as likely to go to Sandakan in Malaysia and Hellfire Pass in Thailand as they are at the moment to go to Gallipoli and honour the dead and those who fought and forged the reputation of this country—a country that values freedom for its own citizenry but is also prepared to fight for the freedom of others. I hope that we continue to see this as being of paramount importance if we are to be regarded as a civil society.

We have never had such POW numbers since the Second World War, but it is right and fitting that we now honour all of them with that memorial in Ballarat, with a special designation. But I do repeat that it is a very great shame that in honouring them with the memorial in a very beautiful place, in Ballarat, in southern Australia, the memorial will not have ongoing federal funding to make sure that as the years go by the gold letters never fade and the gardens do not fall into disrepair, and that there is appropriate interpretation, visitor facilities and maybe publications to come which further describe the importance and meaning of the POWs, with their names listed there row after row.

In supporting this bill I say congratulations to the Ballarat group who struggled for very many years, first with an idea and then in delivering a very significant and superb memorial. I also want to say, regarding memorials to come that may be eligible for this designation, that they should not hesitate to seek the designation—even though they must understand that a very important and focused part of this bill is that they cannot ask for or expect any federal funding support. Let me just say finally, now that the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts has joined us, that in the same vein the Labor government is nominating a whole list, as we must, of new places for the national register of heritage listed places. I very much support that.

For example, just the other day the Myall Creek massacre site in central New South Wales was listed. If I had known that site was to be listed, I would have made an enormous effort to get there myself to acknowledge its significance. But unfortunately, while we are listing more and more heritage places of great significance to this nation, there is no funding to support that heritage listing—perhaps to help restore a property or a place, to introduce interpretation, to maintain the locality or to make sure there is proper access to and security for that site. I think that is a very serious problem. With the government nursing the coalition created $22 billion surplus, I would very much like the minister to ask caucus to redress this failure of funding for the national memorial at Ballarat, and the new category it will fit into, and for places of national heritage significance right across the country.

Sid Sidebottom (Braddon, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Military Memorials of National Significance Bill 2008, like just about all the bills that have been introduced into this parliament this year, is fulfilling a promise. This bill gives effect to the 2007 election commitment by the now Labor government to recognise the Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial in Ballarat, Victoria, as a memorial of national significance. The bill also provides for other significant memorials that meet specified criteria to be recognised as military memorials of national significance in the future. Along with all members of this House, particularly those who have spoken on this bill, I want to recognise the service of our service men and women. They have given of themselves in the service of this country and unfortunately some lost their lives in the service of Australia. In particular, and in relation to this bill, I want to recognise those ex-prisoners of war who still survive today and those who unfortunately lost their lives. I recognise that and thank them for their service.

Today I would like to speak of a group of service people who I believe do not receive the recognition they are due and who are often ignored—the national servicemen of Australia. Unfortunately, their fight to get recognition took some time. I wish to take the House through some of the history of national service and some of the history of the recognition, or lack of recognition, of national servicemen. I also wish to speak about their memorial, which is to come into reality here in the national capital. It has exciting prospects, and I know that they are very excited about it. First and foremost, it is informative to understand that the National Servicemen’s Association of Australia was auspiced by the late Barry Vicary, in Toowoomba, Queensland, on 28 November 1987 to seek a better deal for Vietnam era national servicemen and a medal recognising national service. When Barry learnt of the earlier and much larger national service scheme, he immediately widened the organisation to include them. The association now has branches Australia-wide and is the second largest ex-service organisation after the RSL. National servicemen added a new word to the Australian language: ‘nashos’. National Service Day, on 14 February, marks the day the last nasho marched out of camp. I am very appreciative to Allen Callaghan, who is the national media officer of the National Servicemen’s Association of Australia, for a lot of this information. I am a patron of the National Servicemen’s Association—and proudly so—of my sub-branches of Mersey and Burnie. As I mentioned earlier, other members in this House are patrons of that mighty association.

I think it is illuminating to look at the story of national service. There were two main periods of national service between 1951 and 1972, and each of these surrounded real and/or perceived threats to our national interest. Between 1951 and 1959, it was in the context of the Cold War, the communist victory in China, the Malay situation of 1948 and the outbreak of the Korean War in 1950. It was designed to build up our depleted forces after World War II, to raise a force of partially trained men and—I quote from the time—‘to improve physical fitness and the discipline of young men’. Between 1951 and 1957, about 33,000 young men per annum trained. All but 5,000 of them trained in the Army. In effect, they spent something like three months in training and—people tend to forget this—three years in the Citizens Military Forces. In 1957, the universal obligation was abolished and replaced with a selective training system, which was eventually abolished in 1959. As many in this House will remember, events in South-East Asia in 1965—and of course closer to home, including in New Guinea—saw the reactivation of the previous system, with conscripts being liable for overseas service.

Apart from these strategic considerations, it was a time of full employment, and recruitment figures were allegedly low. Selection for military service was by ballot, variously dubbed ‘Russian roulette’ and ‘the birthday ballot’. I remember being subject to that—and it was a very, very worrisome time. Between 1965 and 1972, over 800,000 registered for national service. Of these, 64,000 were called up; 19,500 served in Vietnam alongside 21,000 regulars; 200 were killed; there were 1,279 non-fatal casualties, alongside 242 regulars killed; and there were 1,500 non-fatal casualties.

National service was abolished on 5 December 1972. Over 287,000 men had their lives interrupted. They spent time and effort to be trained, and were on call to defend their country. Over 200 died in service and over 1,200 were injured. They deserve our thanks. Whatever their views were on national service, I must say that many supported it and enjoyed it, and still speak very fondly of those days. Indeed, I think they would have it that all people should have a stint in national service.

They were conscripted for training in peacetime. Let us not forget that their lives were in the hands of others. They had no choice. They did their job and many found fellowship in each other’s company, especially with the formation of the National Servicemen’s Association, as I just mentioned, in 1987 and, in my home state of Tassie, in 1995. But their compulsory service was not formally recognised by this nation until late 2001, at the onset of—you guessed it—a federal election. In 1998 the Minster for Veterans’ Affairs said, and it was reiterated right up until 2001:

National Service was no more demanding that normal peacetime service and does not, in its own right, warrant the award of a medal

But normal peacetime service is voluntary. National service was compulsory. National servicemen had no choice but serve—and serve they did at the behest of their government and their nation.

I remember on 12 May 1999 rising in this House to try and argue for recognition of national servicemen—particularly recognition more formally through a medal. I remember it received a very short hearing and certainly was not greatly supported by many others. As I said, it took until 2001 and the onset of a federal election to finally have their service recognised. I would just like to comment on that before I go on to speak about their national service memorial.

In 2001 the Australian government recognised the contribution of national servicemen to Australia’s defence preparedness with the award of the Anniversary of National Service 1951 to 1972 Medal. The bronze medal—it is a beautiful-looking medal—is of a double-sided design with the recipient’s service number and name engraved on the rim. The front depicts the triservice badge surmounted by the Federation Star and the words ‘Anniversary of National Service 1951 to 1972’. On the other side is the Southern Cross on a field of radiating lines inside a cogwheel, representing the integral role of the armed services in our community. Both sides are surmounted by the crown. The ribbon uses the colours of the three services during the national service era: Navy white, Army jungle green and RAAF light blue, and Australia’s then national colours of blue and gold. The ochre strip represents our land. In 2006 national servicemen, along with all other servicemen and servicewomen, were awarded the Australian Defence Medal.

If I may, I would like now to share with you the ideas of the National Servicemen’s Association of Australia and their dream—which, hopefully, soon will be a reality—of a memorial. They have been invited by the Australian War Memorial to have a memorial nearby the Australian War Memorial. It is great to know that the memorial plans have been approved by all state branches and all the members. The memorial has a target date for completion and dedication of 2009 or early 2010. We all know how long these things take, but like all good nashos they want this thing to be done properly; it is very important to them. The national service memorial—as you probably know, Mr Deputy Speaker Schultz, because you are very well informed—is based around a fountain, but I am told the fountain can stand alone as a monument anyway. They are looking to use the water from the Australian War Memorial for the fountain. But if there is no water because of drought then, with the good nasho common sense, the bowl can stand as it is. It will have a plinth of Wondabyne sandstone from Gosford, on the New South Wales Central Coast, matching that of the Australian War Memorial itself. So here we have, symbolically, this relationship between the War Memorial and the new national service memorial. I think that is lovely. The stone will also be used to pave the surrounds and for the seating.

The highly polished black slab is expected to be of South Australian granite with hollowed-out shapes, and the bowl will be of solid cast bronze, so it will be quite beautiful. Indeed, the granite part reminds me a little bit of our black granite fountain here in Parliament House. The Anniversary of National Service 1951-1972 Medal, which I have just been speaking about, will be reproduced on the corner nearest the Australian War Memorial and the Navy, Army and Air Force badges will be on the other three sides. The memorial will bear the simple inscription:

Dedicated to those who served and in memory of all who died.

A total of 212 national servicemen, as I mentioned earlier, died on active service in Borneo and Vietnam. I have just received a copy of the National Service Honour Roll and it really is poignant and quite moving when you see all these names listed. They served our country through national service and lost their lives. I would like to recognise publicly the seven Tasmanians who lost their lives: David Banfield, Kevin Brewer, Geoffrey Coombs, Guy Godden, Francis Hyland, Albert McCormack and Peter Penneyston.

Two plaques adjoining the seats will name the memorial for visitors and give a brief outline of national service—and I have just given the text, if I can offer my services; although I think Allen Callaghan can do a better job in that regard. The full history will be told inside the Australian War Memorial in the post-1945 gallery. The sandstone plinth represents the Army; the sky reflected in the polished black granite slab represents the Air Force; and the bronze bowl, hopefully with water in it, represents the Navy. The memorial is intended to be non-triumphal and to invite reflection. The intended site for this memorial is beautiful. The view from the seating around the fountain is down Anzac Avenue over the old and new parliament houses to the Brindabella ranges in the distance.

Mr Deputy Speaker, you might be interested to know that the funds include a donation of $150,000 from the federal government, and I acknowledge that and thank the former government; $150,000 from businessman Kerry Stokes; donations from state governments and local authorities around Australia; and contributions from national service and RSL sub-branches and individuals. The estimated cost, including the paved surrounds, seating and box hedges is up to half a million dollars.

The National Servicemen’s Association of Australia undertook the memorial on behalf of all Australian national servicemen. All nashos will be invited to the dedication parade and service and the dinner to follow that night. The memorial’s architect is Mr Richard Johnson, one of our nation’s leading architects, of Johnson Pilton Walker.

I would like to conclude by paying tribute to the National Servicemen’s Association and to all nashos who served this country. Though many of them may not have served overseas, they did indeed prepare to serve this country, and psychologically they were prepared to do so. It took us far too long to recognise that. The story of the Vietnam nashos did us no credit for a long time. Many people’s views—I was one of them—of the war were unfortunately mixed with our attitudes towards those who served us. Since then, I have been very proud of how our nation, particularly in relation to Iraq and other places of conflict, has made it very clear that we respect and honour the service of those who are ordered into these areas of combat to serve this nation. We should have been very proud of them in the past, and now we are. I personally want to put on record that I mixed my politics with a dose of humanity and the politics came out but not the humanity, and I certainly have reflected on that for many years afterwards.

I would particularly like to thank my local branches. They were one of the first groups that schooled me in politics. I am not a political person by nature and I do not have a background in it. They schooled me in politics and certainly reminded me that they wanted some recognition for their service. I want to thank my late friend, Frankie Watts, whom I miss, for all the support he gave me when I first came into parliament. I certainly thank him for the great work he did in getting recognition for the nashos and bringing them together. They are a fine group of people and I know that many members in this House have a lot to do with them. I am really glad we have recognised them and I am looking forward to their memorial being opened. I know they will be inviting all of us to the memorial and that they will be very proud to see it. I certainly commend the bill to the House. I thank the government for honouring their commitment to the ex-POWs from Ballarat, whom I thank very much for their service. I wish to recognise their families, particularly the families of those who lost loved ones in the service of this country.

Alby Schultz (Hume, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Before I call the member for Mitchell, I would like to inform the House that the interruption caused by the exhaust system in the parliament had absolutely nothing to do with the fact that the member for Braddon commenced his contribution, and the ceasing of the noise created by that glitch had nothing to do with the fact that the member for Braddon finished his contribution!

Alex Hawke (Mitchell, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to support the Military Memorials of National Significance Bill 2008 and the amendment from the member for Mackellar. In doing so let me first pay tribute to all of those who have served in our armed forces—the returned service men and women—and all those who have had the unfortunate distinction of being prisoners of war.

If you go to many of our country towns and the town centres of our suburbs and metropolitan areas, you will find memorials to our brave soldiers who went to war. These memorials were generally funded by the people within those communities as a personal tribute to their soldiers. Indeed, they stand as a tribute to the true self-reliant spirit of this country in looking after each other and recognising those who did so much in our name.

It is a wonderful thing to think that each of these communities voluntarily got together to fund memorials to their soldiers. The rolls of honour will stand at the heart of our communities for evermore. In supporting this legislation I think it is important to recognise that, while there are memorials of national significance, every war memorial is indeed a memorial of national significance.

This bill will provide a mechanism to honour the government’s election commitment to declare the Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial in Ballarat to be a national memorial. It has been said this bill has come about from a mistake and a hasty promise, but it is a mistake and a hasty promise that I am happy to support and to embrace as my own.

I note that national memorials are already recognised under the National Memorials Ordinance 1928 and are restricted to memorials within the Australian Capital Territory. This bill will recognise the national significance of the Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial in Ballarat and will enable, in the future, other memorials that meet specific criteria to be recognised as a military memorial of national significance. And who indeed could argue with that?

The Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial located in the Ballarat Botanical Gardens records the names of more than 35,000 Australian POWs—8,600 died or were killed when they were prisoners of war and more than 4,000 have no known grave. The lists of names on the memorial are arranged in alphabetical order, grouped by conflict, commencing with the Boer War and going through to the Korean War, etched into the 130-metre black granite wall. Across Australia there has not been any recognition of the pain and suffering endured by prisoners of war in the service of our nation. The motto of these brave prisoners was: ‘When you go home, tell them of us and say that we gave our tomorrow for your today.’

This legislation is a good development for so many of the memorials in our country that deserve the recognition and tribute of our federal government as part of its ongoing commitment to the defence of our nation and the memory of those who served.

I had great pride serving in the Australian Army Reserve in one of my local community’s regiments, the 1st/15th Royal New South Wales Lancers. Indeed, it was some of the former exuberant members of my regiment who jumped their ships to participate in the Boer War. In 1899, before our nation had federated, a squadron of the regiment, which had been training in England, became the first colonial troops to arrive in South Africa for active service against the Boers in the South African War. They jumped their ships to be there—part of that great Australian spirit of having a go and wanting to be involved in the world and its events. I pay tribute to them. With 21 battle honours, the 1st/15th Royal New South Wales Lancers is one of the most highly decorated units in the Australian Army. It was an immense privilege to serve with the fine men and women who make up the regiment today.

This bill specifically will deliver on the promise in relation to Ballarat and other military memorials of national significance, creating a new category. It will bring greater status. It is of more concern, however, that there is an issue with the ongoing Commonwealth funding for memorials. There are many other places in our country that deserve federal government recognition and assistance and I have no concerns in supporting the legislation and its implications.

The importance that war memorials hold in serving as visual reminders of the sacrifice of the brave men and women who served our country was impressed upon me when I trekked the Kokoda Trail back in 2003. So many of our young Australians trek Kokoda today. They attend memorials at Isurava or the dawn service at Gallipoli, where so many of their young counterparts fought many years ago. They attend to pay tribute; they attend to remember. When you go today you see the rusty weapons in the jungle at Kokoda and the depressions where pits were dug by Australian soldiers. You see why the Aussie soldier earned the title ‘digger’. You actually can see, amongst the massive mountains and the valleys, the site of fierce fighting that saved our nation. It is very moving. I was deeply moved and humbled by the experience and the importance of the Kokoda campaign in the history of our country.

To the Howard government’s everlasting credit, they provided the funding for a memorial to be constructed at Isurava on the Kokoda track—a magical place—which has been done so well. A photo of the memorial and some of us who served as young officers in the Army is always on my desk. The incredible ambience of this place and the solemness of the beautiful memorial which overlooks the valley where so much fighting took place stay with me always. There are four words inscribed on the four granite pillars at Isurava, four words that mean so much to many who have served—courage, endurance, mateship and sacrifice. Those words say it all about the service so many Australians gave and that must be remembered.

In 1933 we were warned that Japan would pose a major threat to Australian security. The head of strategic studies at the Australian National University, Professor David Horner, recently wrote:

It is now generally agreed that the Australian defence policy between the wars and until the fall of Singapore was, at the best, naively optimistic, and at the worst, some might say, close to treason.

While many political leaders of that time may have neglected the defence of Australia, the responsibility of the young diggers in answering the call is very inspiring. It is a lesson we must always remember. We must support our defence forces. We must support legislation such of this, which adds so much to the fine military traditions of our great country. Those Australian diggers were young, inexperienced, outnumbered and outgunned. During the ensuing three months, the Australians fought against overwhelming odds. They forced the Japanese to contest every inch of the rugged and treacherous Kokoda Trail as they advanced towards their objective of Port Moresby.

As I speak today, I still starkly remember the overwhelming emotion that I felt standing at the Isurava war memorial built by the Australian government. It was at Isurava where the first Victoria Cross was won on Australian soil. It was awarded to Private Bruce Kingsbury of the 2nd/14th Battalion. It was Kingsbury’s initiative and superb courage that made it possible for the Australians to recapture the battalion’s position and cause heavy casualties among the enemy. His coolness, determination and devotion to duty in the face of great adversity was not only an inspiration to his comrades but, through the establishment of the Isurava memorial, to all Australians who are the future of the country for which he so valiantly fought.

Private Kingsbury was one of the few survivors of a platoon which had been overrun and severely cut down by the enemy. Immediately, he volunteered to join a different platoon which had been ordered to counterattack. He rushed forward, firing the Bren gun from his hip, through terrific machine-gun fire and succeeded in clearing a path through the enemy. Continuing to sweep enemy positions with his fire, he inflicted an extremely high number of casualties on them. Private Kingsbury was then seen to fall to the ground by the side of a large rock, shot dead by a bullet from a sniper hiding in the wood. Private Kingsbury displayed a complete disregard for his own safety at Isurava but thereby saved his friends. When you stand at Isurava you can still see today the rock, the large boulder where Private Bruce Kingsbury was gunned down by a sniper. It is an experience in humility and gratitude that I would recommend to every Australian to stand at the war memorial at Isurava, to see the rock where Private Bruce Kingsbury was gunned down after conducting such a valiant action, which earned him the first Victorian Cross on Australian soil.

Today I am reminded of Kingsbury’s sacrifice each time I drive down along the memorial drive to Canberra. Another great initiative of the Howard government was to rename the road from Sydney to Canberra ‘Remembrance Drive’. At each rest stop, information about a Victoria Cross winner is attached—a wonderful initiative that reminds us of the men who showed such great courage and valour under fire. When Australians stop at these rest stops, they engage in an act of remembrance. Indeed, I make a point of stopping at the Private Bruce Kingsbury rest stop whenever I can on the road from Sydney to Canberra to remember.

The explanatory memorandum of this bill states:

The Bill will provide a mechanism to honour the Government’s election commitment to declare the Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial in Ballarat, to be a national memorial.

The bill may have come about from a mistake, it may have come about from a promise that was made during the election campaign, but again I state that it is an error that I am happy to embrace if it leads to legislation that recognises more of our nationally significant war memorials. It is a mistake that I am happy to say I will embrace and be honoured to support here today.

As already stated, the government has delivered funding for maintenance of the memorial for the next four years. However, the bill is silent on the issue of funding thereafter, and I would suggest to those opposite that this is an issue that we do need to consider further and examine in the light of our future commitments to war memorials across Australia that are outside Canberra and considered to be nationally significant. The Register of War Memorials records two memorials in my own electorate of Mitchell: the Arthur Witling Park war memorial and the Dural Memorial Hall. There are two sites outside of my electorate which I often attend as well—they are in Glenorie within the council area of Baulkham Hills Shire—but there are just two war memorials in Mitchell. We are also served by a magnificent RSL club, the Castle Hill RSL club, which is an integral part of our community and also supports these war memorials.

I want to say a few words about the war memorials in my electorate, which will be instructive to the House because, on Anzac Day of this year, I had the privilege of attending the dawn service at the Arthur Witling Park war memorial at the corner of Old Northern Road and McMullen Avenue in Castle Hill. It was a great experience—if anyone had any doubt about patriotism and the belief in the importance of remembering those who have served and paid the ultimate sacrifice—to turn up at a dawn service with 5,000 members of my local community to see teams of young people walking the streets at four o’clock in the morning and to see the entire memorial site jam-packed with people. People were standing on the roads trying to get into this memorial site to attend the service. It is a great tribute, 100 years from the events that took place, to Australians and their capacity to remember those who have paid the ultimate price and given so much for Australia.

The memorial at Arthur Witling Park is large and well kept. The whole memorial is constructed in the shape of the rising sun badge. The centre point of the memorial is a large flagpole and a huge white painted rock with the words ‘Lest we forget’ in black, placed on brown and black marble. There is a shallow pool in the shape of an arch surrounding the centre point. Around the wall of the elevated garden are eight plaques, one each for the following: the RSL, Australian women’s services, the Royal Australian Air Force, the Royal Australian Navy, the Australian Commonwealth military forces and Merchant Navy Australia. The whole memorial has a flagpole, and just off to the right of the memorial is a pine tree grown from an original lone pine of Gallipoli.

My community is well serviced by a strong veteran community, and the acts of remembrance engaged in at Arthur Witling Park are very important to the fabric of my community and our society. The inscriptions on the memorial dedicate the memorial to all those who paid the supreme sacrifice and who served in all wars and conflicts on duty for our country. One inscription reads:

This Memorial is dedicated to the men and women from the Electorate of Mitchell who have served in the Armed Forces of Australia and to those who paid the supreme sacrifice.

I also record my appreciation for the Dural Memorial Hall, which stands to recognise World War I. We do need to ensure that our war memorials overseas are also protected and preserved for future generations to witness. Whilst our well-known overseas war memorials at Isuarava and Gallipoli are well kept, some others are not. I recently became aware of a problem from a member of my electorate, Mr Garry Massie, who has recently returned from visiting the prisoner-of-war memorial, the JEATH War Museum, in Kanchanaburi, Thailand. The JEATH War Museum commemorates the work undertaken on the construction of the Burma rail line by, amongst others, Australia’s POWs during World War II. The JEATH museum bears witness to the suffering of those that fell during its construction. It is an open-air museum. JEATH stands for Japan, England, Australia, Thailand and Holland. It was built in 1977 by a Thai abbot in the style of the huts that were used to imprison prisoners of war. The museum contains bunks and original pictures of the actual soldiers who died alongside the articles and other authentic items on the site. The result is a picture of cramped squalor which gives visitors a genuine insight into the suffering of the soldiers on the Burma rail line. However, I am informed by Mr Massie and others that these artefacts are in some state of disrepair. Many of the pictures are currently held under plastic sheeting and the artefacts are clearly deteriorating. Considering their historical significance to Australia and to our nation’s military history, they are stored in unsuitable conditions. I call on the government to think about sending curators from the Australian War Memorial to visit Kanchanaburi and to undertake a project that could see this collection restored and placed on display in a way that would protect it from damage in the future.

I return to the legislation. It is wonderful to think that so many of our communities voluntarily got together to fund memorials to recognise the soldiers from their communities. Those rolls of honour will stand at the heart of the communities forevermore. They will stand there as a tribute to the spirit not just of the soldiers and the people who went but of those communities who got together to recognise them. One of the primary functions of government is to provide for the defence of our nation, to look after those who have returned from conflicts and to provide for the memory of those who served, who paid the ultimate sacrifice and who were prisoners of war. As a parliament, we must work to ensure Australia always has that self-reliant, caring spirit that sees communities construct memorials—that spirit of duty, service and voluntary sacrifice. I heartily endorse and support the Military Memorials of National Significance Bill 2008, and the second reading amendment moved by the member for Mackellar, and I thank the government for the legislation.

Richard Marles (Corio, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in support of the Military Memorials of National Significance Bill 2008. I do so with a great deal of pride and a great deal of pleasure. Before I commence my remarks on the bill, I acknowledge the students, seated in the galleries, from the northern Lindfield primary school on my left and from the southern Scots School Albury on my right. I think it is fantastic that they are here in Canberra today and that they will hear this particular debate as it really does go to our nation’s history and to the essence of the Australian character. I certainly welcome them to Canberra, I welcome them to the House and I hope that they have a fantastic and educative time while they are here.

This bill honours an election commitment that was given by the Prime Minister on 27 June last year on a visit to Ballarat. In essence it will recognise the Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial, which is located in the Ballarat Botanical Gardens, as a military memorial of national significance. It is a very appropriate, serious and significant act for that memorial to be declared in that way. I want to talk about the memorial and its significance to our country and, indeed, the significance of the experiences of prisoners of war to our country. Before I do, it would perhaps be beneficial to explain the purpose of the bill. This bill builds upon the National Memorials Ordinance 1928, which was enacted under the Seat of Government (Administration) Act 1910, which was in turn enacted by the then Fisher Labor government. That administration act remained the constitutional basis for law-making in the Australian Capital Territory right through until 1988, when the Australian Capital Territory (Self-Government) Act was enacted by the then Hawke government.

The National Memorials Ordinance establishes the Canberra National Memorials Committee, the chair of which is the Prime Minister. The committee’s role is to consider submissions relating to national memorials and to declare them as military memorials of national significance. Importantly, however, as it currently stands, the committee can only examine proposed memorials on ‘national land’. That obviously means land within the ACT. Memorials in other parts of Australia, as matters stand at present, can only be described as ‘national in character’. It is that condition that will be altered by this bill.

The importance of doing that is borne out by the particular history of the Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial in Ballarat. The Ballarat memorial was first announced by the then Liberal member for Ballarat, Michael Ronaldson, who is now a senator, back in 1999. No doubt he will be very gratified by the fact that this memorial will ultimately be declared a military memorial of national significance. At the time of its announcement, Mr Ronaldson said that Ballarat would have an Australian ex-prisoners of war memorial of ‘national status’. The former Assistant Treasurer, Rod Kemp, referred to the memorial as a ‘national memorial’ when announcing that donations for it would be tax deductible. However, there were a number of people in Ballarat, including those who had been working on the memorial, who wanted the memorial to have a greater significance and for it to be declared a military memorial of national significance. However, at the time, the Howard government said that that was not possible as a result of the current framework of the law. Understandably, that was a matter which was a cause of significant frustration for those people who had worked tirelessly in bringing about that memorial. It was frustrating for those people who had raised the funds for the memorial, rallied public support for its construction, supplied goods and worked on its construction and, in fact, now curate the memorial. It was also frustrating for those organisations which had been at the heart of bringing the memorial into existence—namely, the Ballarat RSL and, of course, the Ex-Prisoners of War Welfare Association—and for the people of Ballarat themselves.

This was raised with the then Labor opposition at the time of the visit by the now Prime Minister to Ballarat in June of last year. A commitment was made that if Labor were elected to government then the law would be changed so that this memorial could be deemed to be a military memorial of national significance. In doing this and in presenting this bill, we acknowledge the work of all those who have brought that memorial into being—in particular, Liz Heagney, who was acknowledged in the Queen’s Birthday Honours List for her work in compiling the more than 35,000 names of those Australian service men and women who have been prisoners of war. That was in itself a very significant research task and is a very significant contribution to our national history. It will form a basis for families, seeking to learn about their own family history, who visit the memorial to find out whether or not a particular ancestor of theirs experienced being a prisoner of war.

The memorial and monument takes a special place in the Ballarat community. It is now the focal point of Anzac Day services there. The war memorial is very clearly a part of Ballarat’s social fabric. To understand it better, I consulted the secretary-trustee of the Ballarat memorial, Mr Bill Bahr. He sent me a letter, in response to my request, about what this memorial means to him and what it means to the people of Ballarat and to those who have been prisoners of war. I would like to convey his moving sentiments to the House today:

The Memorial has a place in my heart as it lists the names of relatives and friends of my father on its stark Black Granite walls; it is a quiet place of reflection on the enduring spirit of the Australian people, the ability of Australians to maintain their dignity and courage when all around them they experience horrendous atrocities and appalling hardships.

The significance of the Memorial to the people of Australia is one that can only be measured in the strength and deeds of the 35,000 Australian men and women whose names are listed on the Memorial walls. We as a Nation owe them a debt of gratitude and our enduring thanks for their contribution to the building of our great Nation. Prior to the establishment of this Memorial, no definitive list of names of Australian ex-POWs was available from any official government source. The Memorial has since its opening become a focal point for those doing research on family members and those that are visiting a loved one. The 35,000 Australians listed on the wall continue to educate younger Australians on the human cost and the futility of War.

“Lest We Forget”.

I am sure you will agree with me, Mr Deputy Speaker, that they are truly moving words and do convey to the House the significance of this memorial both to the nation and, of course, to Ballarat.

It is wonderful to see how many people who have spoken in this debate. It indicates a significance that I think all of us in Australia find in our own military history and the way in which it speaks to the essence of the Australian character. We are not unusual in looking to our military history to find the elements of our national character—many countries do it. But what we find when we engage in that exercise is extraordinary, and it is different to that of other countries because we do not necessarily celebrate the victories or the military conquests, albeit that that, of course, is the aim of military activity. What we find as Australians when we look to our own military history to see how it speaks to our character is a sense of camaraderie in adversity. We find Australians working together in the most difficult of situations. We see brothers and sisters helping each other through horrendous situations. In a word, what we find is mateship.

The two iconic battles of our Australian history, Kokoda and Gallipoli, are not necessarily about their military outcomes—indeed, they are not about those outcomes at all. What they are about is the experience of those who participated in those campaigns. One of those campaigns, Gallipoli, by any measure was a terrible military failure. Even in Kokoda, which ultimately led to a victory, it was in that grinding retreat along the Kokoda Track that we find the stories which capture the heart of the Australian imagination. These are stories of Australians working together in the most difficult of circumstances, being there for each other and helping each other through. It is a wonderful characteristic, it is uniquely Australian and it is a lesson that we learnt from these conflicts that, I think, in many respects other nations do not learn, or at least not to the same significance.

In that context, it is not surprising that the history of prisoners of war would speak to this particular Australian character, because those who were prisoners of war experienced the most horrendous circumstances and performed great acts of courage in assisting others to get through that terrible experience. More than 35,000 Australians, as I have stated, each of whom’s name is now listed on this memorial in Ballarat, have been prisoners of war. Approximately 200 were in the Boer War, 4,000 in the First World War, 30,000 in the Second World War and 29 in the Korean War. Of those 35,000, nearly 8,600 lost their lives, 8,000 of which lost their lives during the Second World War. So it is not surprising that when we look at the history of prisoners of war in Australia we have a particular focus on the experience of the Second World War.

The Thai-Burma Railway typified the horrendous experience of prisoners of war during that conflict. It was on the Thai-Burma Railway that we saw one of Australia’s greatest war heroes emerge. Again, like Simpson, a medic at Gallipoli, this war hero was not a warrior as such. He was a doctor. He was a person who helped others. He was, of course, Weary Dunlop. Three-hundred and thirty thousand people worked on the Thai-Burma Railway; 250,000 of those were Asian local workers, and their sacrifice should never be forgotten. Nearly 90,000 of their number ultimately lost their lives. In addition, 61,000 were allied prisoners of war, of whom 12,000 were Australians, and it is estimated that 2,700 of those died on that terrible railway line.

It is hard to imagine the horrendous conditions which those prisoners of war experienced or the unfathomable circumstances that Weary Dunlop triumphed over. These prisoners of war experienced terrible malnutrition, which in turn led to beri-beri, a condition which sees the swelling of the stomach. Cholera was endemic and there was the particular scourge of tropical ulcers. These ulcers spread rapidly in the damp tropical conditions. Just a small scratch could give rise to one of these ulcers. They were very difficult to heal and ultimately could become fatal. The kind of medicine used to deal with these ulcers was to sharpen a spoon to scoop out the rotting flesh. On other occasions, these soldiers were told to stand in rivers where there were flesh-eating fish to try and clean the wound. In many cases, there was no remedy for these ulcers but to engage in amputation. When that occurred, more often than not the prisoners of war were in such a condition that they were unable to withstand the shock of that procedure.

Weary Dunlop was at the forefront of all of this, and it needs to be remembered that in the midst of this Weary Dunlop was himself a sick man, suffering from exactly those same tropical ulcers. But, with his hat on its particularly odd angle and with his determination, he put his own life on the line. He stood up to those who were administering the camps and he became an inspiration for all of those who were suffering in these conditions. Arch Flanagan, a prisoner of war, said this in relation to Weary Dunlop:

Colonel Dunlop kept devotedly to his rounds. His legs bandaged for ulcers, his face etched with responsibility and sleeplessness, his cap as ever defiantly askew, he was our symbol of hope. More than ever now we thought, ‘If Weary goes we all go’.

Donald Stuart, another ex-prisoner of war, said:

When death and despair reached for us he stood fast, his only thought our well-being. Faced with guards who had the power of life or death, ignoble tyrants who hated us, he was the lighthouse of sanity in a universe of suffering and madness.

These are incredibly moving words and they do speak to the amazing difficulty of that situation, but they also speak to the inspiration and the triumph that was Weary Dunlop and the Australian spirit in those circumstances.

The Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial in the Ballarat Botanical Gardens is a wonderful testament to the sacrifice and experience of all Australian prisoners of war. It was designed by a local sculptor, Peter Blizzard. It resides at the intersection of Wendouree Parade and Carlton Streets in Ballarat, near Lake Wendouree. Its size and scale are very large in design. It consists of six basalt obelisks that name all of the countries in which Australians were prisoners of war. The polished 130-metre black granite wall, which cost $1.8 million to build, names all of the prisoners of war in our history in historical order. A large reflective pool feeds into other overflows and waterfalls throughout the memorial, and in the memorial the presence of flowing water is described as ‘symbolising spirituality, healing, cleansing, birth and rebirth’.

This debate, this bill and the monument in Ballarat are, I think, indicative of a search that all Australians are finding for our own character through a renewed interest in our military history, and we really see it in the intense interest which is now shown in Anzac Day ceremonies around Australia. This is not just in the major capitals of Melbourne, Brisbane and Sydney but in a range of regional centres as well—for example, the 2,000 people who attended Broome’s Bedford Park this year and the same number who went to Albany’s Desert Mounted Corps Memorial on Mount Clarence. Over 1,000 people went to the Wollongong Cenotaph and 2,000 were in Burleigh Heads. In my electorate of Corio, which, of course, includes part of the city of Geelong, 7,500 people attended the mid-morning service in Johnstone Park, which was the focus of ceremonies on Anzac Day.

Johnstone Park is overlooked by the most significant military memorial in Geelong itself, which is the Geelong and District Peace Memorial. This memorial has long been a focal point of Geelong’s military history and memorial services. The foundation stone for this memorial, built at a cost of £13,106 and opened by Governor Lord Somers in 1925, was laid in 1922. It is a very significant memorial. On the east and west walls lie the names of those who have fought in the First World War and on the south wall have later been added the names of those who fought in World War II. The Geelong Advertiser on 1 November 1926 said, in relation to the peace memorial in Geelong: ‘The permanency with which these tablets are framed in bronze leaves no doubt that the roll of honour will outlast many generations who will be constantly reminded of the sacrifices made by those who fought in defence of their country.’

I mentioned the memorial in Geelong because an important aspect of this bill is that it does now raise the possibility for other memorials around Australia to be deemed military memorials of national significance. In saying that, it is important to understand that there are now strict guidelines around that so that the deeming of a memorial in those terms is, in a sense, not devalued. It is important that these memorials are of an appropriate scale and design. It is important that they are the focal point for lots of community commemorations. It is important that they serve a national character. A wonderful outcome of this process and of this bill is that we have the possibility now of commemorating many more aspects of Australia’s military history through deeming more memorials as military memorials of national significance.

This is a very fitting acknowledgement of all the Australian service personnel who have experienced time as prisoners of war. This is a wonderful debate to have been a part of. I would like to finish by commending to the House the work of the current member for Ballarat, Cathy King, in ensuring that this honour is bestowed upon this memorial. It is also again worth mentioning Michael Ronaldson for his work in initiating the memorial, along with the Ballarat RSL, the Ex-Prisoners of War Association of Australia and all of those in Ballarat.

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

At the outset I indicate my support for the Military Memorials of National Significance Bill 2008 and for the motion moved by my colleague the honourable member for Mackellar. It is important that a grateful nation thanks veterans who risked everything to ensure that, as Australians, we enjoy the freedom, the stability and the way of life that we have as a nation and which has made us the envy of people around the world. As the previous speaker indicated, it is certainly healthy that on both sides of the parliament—and indeed right throughout the nation—there is a sense of collective gratitude to those people who helped to make sure that Australians today have the sort of society that we do. It is also important that, regardless of whether individuals support a sphere of conflict in which Australian service men and women have participated or not, the service given by those service men and women to the nation be respected and honoured. That also is something which is now, I think, guaranteed for the future. I trust that we will never see again the shameful treatment that Vietnam veterans received from some sections of the Australian community when they returned from service abroad. It took far too long for these Australians to be properly recognised. As a nation we have moved on, and as a nation we now recognise the service of those people who risked everything so that Australians can be part of the most wonderful nation in the world.

I support the principles contained in this bill. I do note the provisions of the amendment to the motion and that, prior to the election, the Prime Minister, when Leader of the Opposition, promised to declare the Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial in Ballarat a national memorial. Technically that election promise is being breached because, as the then government said, it is only possible to have national memorials in the Australian Capital Territory. The government has sought to give what it deems to be an appropriate level of recognition to the Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial in Ballarat by creating a new category of military memorial, namely the military memorials of national significance.

While this bill will allow the Ballarat memorial to be recognised or for its recognition to be elevated, it is also possible for other memorials around the country to be similarly recognised as military memorials of national significance. There will be guidelines and it is very important that we do not water down the significance of military memorials of national significance.

It is widely recognised that the Ballarat memorial has enjoyed the support of both sides of politics. In fact, the former Howard government provided a grant of half a million dollars towards the memorial, which is the largest federal government grant allocated to a memorial outside of Canberra. The honourable member for Corio in his contribution appropriately recognised the role carried out by the former member for Ballarat, the Hon. Michael Ronaldson, who is now a senator, in relation to supporting the memorial and also he mentioned the work done by the current honourable member for Ballarat.

It is important that, as a nation, we always thank those people who have been responsible for ensuring that we are protected. I want to say that the veterans in our community are role models for all of us; we should put them on a pedestal. Veterans, in particular ex-prisoners of war, have continued to serve their communities many years after their war service or their overseas service has finished. My great uncle was a prisoner of the Japanese in Changi. My grandfather’s brother, John Slipper, was a prisoner of Changi for a considerable period and when liberated weighed only four stone. He went on to live a fulfilling life, but his health was never the same and I suspect that members around the chamber would be able to relate similar situations where family members or friends also suffered as prisoners of war.

The fact that the memorial at Ballarat highlights the role carried out by ex-prisoners of war is important. I want to see more memorials in regional areas right around the country. I must say that over the years I have been privileged to visit numbers of war cemeteries. At my own expense, as a young person backpacking around, I went to Lone Pine at Gallipoli and I was shocked by how young many of those were who fell in the service of their nation. I also went to Kranji in Singapore and to El Alamein and I have to say again that those people who lost their lives to make sure that as Australians we live in a safe country ought to be lauded and respected. Our memory of them must be upheld. That is why the Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial in Ballarat is really important.

Right around our country on Anzac Day and on other days of commemoration of military matters we seem to have an increasing level of support from all sections of the community, particularly young Australians. Like other honourable members I go to large numbers of Anzac Day services, in particular dawn services. I am actually able to get to two or three dawn services held at different times—for instance at 4.28, 5.28 and 6.28. I suppose it is a minor climatic miracle that dawn seems to break a whole hour or two hours later over the space of 20 or 30 kilometres. But, whenever I go, I am heartened by the fact that so many young people, even babes in arms, come along with their families to help remember those people who risked everything and in some cases lost all to ensure that Australians can enjoy the freedom that we do. Many of our schools increasingly and quite appropriately are having Anzac Day celebrations. I have been to large numbers of Anzac Day celebrations at schools in the electorate of Fisher where those schools actually recognise the service given to this nation by family members of the children at the school.

I applaud the fact that the government has introduced this bill. I suppose this bill is a recognition of what the former government said prior to the election—namely, that national memorials could only be located in Canberra. But the fact that we have this new category of military memorials of national significance does not, in my view, reduce the significance of the other memorials of national significance. It is not really important what we call them; what is important is how we regard them. What is important is that, as Australians in 2008, we give thanks to those people who have served their country—those people who lost their lives, were prisoners of war or were prepared to lose everything so that we might thrive and survive as one of the most prosperous nations in the world today. So I do applaud the government for, I suppose, partially meeting its election promise. The government said that the Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial in Ballarat would be a national memorial. The government is not delivering on that promise but instead is creating a new form of memorial—namely, the military memorial of national significance.

Whatever you call it, it means that this government, like its predecessor, is highlighting the importance of the Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial in Ballarat. The former government helped to fund it, and this government is indeed recognising it as a military memorial of national significance, even if the introduction of this bill is necessary for that to occur. I support the amendment moved by the honourable member for Mackellar and I hope that the government will accept that amendment; but even if the government does not accept that amendment, I support the bill and laud the sentiments behind it.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Children's Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am happy to speak today in support of this bill, the Military Memorials of National Significance Bill 2008. Last year, the now Prime Minister visited Ballarat and committed to recognising the Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial as a national war memorial. This legislation puts in place the mechanism to allow this to happen, and I am very glad of that.

War memorials repay the sacrifice of citizens through honour. I should acknowledge that, in the words I am about to use to talk about this, I have been heavily influenced by the American historian James Mayo, who shaped a lot of my thinking about the contribution of war memorials and indeed provided some of the inspiration for my views on this current piece of legislation. War memorials can be identified from even the classical Greek and Roman eras. The predominant themes through the ages have been religious expression and the proclamation of victory, but mourning and the re-creation of the human spirit are also present. From the Parthenon to the Roman memorial columns and into the mediaeval ages, the funerary architecture of the tombs of knights and princes in churches were memorials. In the 19th century, memorials tended to reflect the strand of nationalism, from the Arc de Triomphe to Trafalgar Square and indeed the Brandenburg Gate. Our American friends emerged from their first century, following the American Revolution, the Civil War and the Spanish-American War, a wealthy and proud nation who in fact innovated commemoration and new developments which went beyond the classical approaches to war memorials.

To describe our own Australian history of memorials, I shall paraphrase the work of Australian historian Ken Inglis, who has written extensively about the history of memorials in Australia, from the colonial monuments through the wars of the 20th century to the extraordinary 1995 campaign commemorating World War II, Australia Remembers, sponsored by Prime Minister Keating’s energetic Minister for Veterans’ Affairs Con Sciacca. Mr Inglis has shown how the fashion in Australia has changed from heroic statues of leaders, such as the one in Melbourne to General Gordon of Khartoum, to the familiar obelisks and diggers of the Great War through to the halls and swimming pools that followed the Second World War.

The brief history of memorials, I think, reveals the relationship between politics and design. War memorials affect people’s emotions at a deep level. In fact, the decision about how a war and its participants are memorialised can be emotional. War, with its human cost, is the most drastic political act that a nation can make. Therefore, I believe that Australians understand that these memorials, these sacred memorials, are unassailable investments from which no economic return is expected. Can there any doubt that the service and sacrifice of our prisoners of war deserves national recognition and honour? Can there be any doubt that those 35,000 brave men and women suffered untold horrors in the course of protecting this nation? Of course there is no doubt—no doubt at all.

The Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial in Ballarat was dedicated in February 2004. It lists the names of each of those 35,000 prisoners of war. It is a magnificent memorial. Yet, despite repeated requests, the ex-POW memorial was constantly refused recognition as a national memorial. I congratulate the member for Ballarat, Catherine King, who has been a tireless advocate for both the memorial and the ex-prisoner of war community in general. This legislation before us has been a long time coming. As Lachlan Grant outlines in his paper What makes a ‘national’ war memorial?, when asked whether the government would reconsider recognising it as a national memorial, the member for Higgins replied:

… the Government has just recognised it with a contribution of $300,000 … let’s not get hung up with syntax …

Syntax is important. What stopped the previous government from recognising this magnificent memorial to every Australian prisoner of war? Unthinking behaviour, it seems to me.

The current law requires all national monuments to be located in the ACT. Heaven forfend that a national government would actually amend a law to recognise such a worthy project! It might come as a surprise to those on the opposite benches, although not all, that not everything of national significance is enclosed within the bounds of the Australian Capital Territory.

The former government also said that we already had a national memorial to prisoners of war, the Changi Chapel at the Royal Military College, Duntroon. That is indeed a poignant and evocative memorial, but it is my understanding that it is directed solely at POWs interned by the Japanese—and, unfortunately, I do not believe it is fully accessible to the public. The Ballarat memorial, on the other hand, is the first memorial in the country to recognise all Australian prisoners of war, from conflicts from the Boer to the Korean wars. The names on that memorial are from every corner of this nation, just as the roll of honour at the Australian War Memorial lists the individual names of the 102,000 Australians who have paid the ultimate price for their country. I believe it is truly a national memorial and I am happy that this government has introduced new legislation setting up new criteria under which memorials outside of Canberra can be recognised.

In fact, Ballarat already holds a number of our national memories. For a small regional town, it certainly punches well above its weight. It is the home of the Eureka Stockade, our only civil uprising, born out of that intensely Australian yearning for a fair go for all. It is also, in fact, the birthplace of my former union, the Australian Workers Union, which sprang to life in the Ballarat district more than 120 years ago—32 years after the Eureka uprising and equally born out of the desire for a fair go. There is even, in Ballarat, the Prime Ministers Avenue, featuring bronze busts of each of our prime ministers.

Let us not forget, either, that Ballarat has long commemorated the service and sacrifice of our military through its Avenue of Honour, the longest in the world, and the Arch of Victory. It is entirely fitting that they should also honour those who often have not received their due—our ex-prisoners of war. As the member for Ballarat has said in this debate:

It is proper that we make it possible for our national remembrance to be undertaken outside Canberra. Australians remember their fallen all around the world. They remember them in Gallipoli in record numbers. They remember them as they walk the Kokoda Track.

Speaking of Kokoda, I am looking forward with some trepidation to walking the track next month with colleagues of mine—Earl Setches, from the Plumbing Trades Employees Union of Australia, and Luke Donnellan, Parliamentary Secretary to the Premier in Victoria. I will be doing it not just to try and understand the courage of the diggers but also to do something for a local school in my area. Through sponsorship, I will be seeking to raise funds and understanding of the Kokoda Track for the Western Autistic School, which has a 25-year history of delivering highly successful education programs to students who have an autism spectrum disorder.

I think that all of the political background noise that has been going on for the last decade must not be allowed to obscure the fact that our ex-prisoners of war deserve our full respect and recognition. The far-sighted people of Ballarat knew this, and they have created a memorial where these ex-prisoners of war, their families and their comrades can come to remember and honour them. As committee member Tom Roberts said in an opinion piece in the Ballarat Courier:

Should the Federal Government have wished to erect such a memorial, it has had 100 years to do so, and a site available since the establishment of Canberra. Ballarat acted because no one else has done so.

I am glad they did. I am glad that the now Prime Minister was so impressed with the memorial last year that he said he would ‘move anything necessary to ensure that this is properly recognised as a national war memorial’. Unlike some of his recent predecessors, the Prime Minister is not bound by the way things have always been done. Although a decades-old act states that national military memorials must be in the ACT, the Prime Minister knows that modern leaders change with the times.

My Lithuanian uncle, Tony Sungaila, married to my mother’s sister, fought in the Second World War. He lived in Lithuania and, in 1939, three of his brothers and sisters disappeared in the occupation following the Russian invasion. When the Germans invaded, in 1941, he joined them. Indeed, he won an Iron Cross for his actions on the Eastern Front. Yet in 1945 the Germans interned my uncle and the rest of his Lithuanian regiment because they were no longer trusted. Consequently, my uncle led a break-out from the camp and took his regiment to join the Americans. I like to think that the bravery and stoicism of this man is commemorated somewhere in the world for his time of internment. His name, and the names of all of the prisoners of war throughout the world, should never be forgotten. The calm defiance of prisoners of war, their determination to survive in the face of desperate conditions and often fearsome treatment, their pride in their country and their refusal to bow down and give in are things that we, in this age of luxury, plasma screens and alcopops, need to remember, honour and learn from.

This war memorial in Ballarat, like all our war memorials, is distinguished because it bestows honour—in this case, on our ex-prisoners of war. Honour cannot be bought or collected; honour can only be bestowed. Honour is bestowed on our ex-prisoners of war because of their suffering. The brutal fact of the Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial is that our families, friends and neighbours fought, suffered and often died. This memorial captures our genuine feeling of sorrow, loss and the need to remember them. This war memorial, like all our war memorials, is part of Australia’s political history. How our past is commemorated through our nation’s military memorials mirrors what we want to remember, and lack of attention often reflects what we wish to forget. The memory of our ex-prisoners of war enhances our national image; neglect defames it. To quote JB Jackson:

A landscape without political history is a landscape without memory or forethought.

The Ballarat memorial ensures our memory of the landscape of sacrifice in war. Defeat in war cannot be forgotten, and our POWs were defeated. Australia must find ways to respect and never to forget those who were captured and those who died for our country to help make that defeat honourable. This memorial honours the individuals who fought for the lost causes in particular battles. Remembering our ex-prisoners of war raises questions about how we make sure that people returning from war are respected and their memory commemorated. With our troops coming out of Iraq and still serving bravely in Afghanistan, we must never forget the danger they are in. Memorials like the one in Ballarat show us that all our military face more than physical harm when they volunteer to serve our country.

In conclusion, I believe that it is worthy and notable that, in the last 20 years, participation by Australians in commemorating sacrifice in war has risen steadily. I regard this legislation as another step to the reawakening of our memory of the sacrifice of those who have gone before us. I commend this bill to the House.

Luke Simpkins (Cowan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As a former major in the Australian Regular Army and a member of my local RSL, the Wanneroo-Joondalup RSL, I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Military Memorials of National Significance Bill 2008 and also to make some comments with regard to that very fine Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial in Ballarat. I say at the outset that it has been many years since I have been to Ballarat. Having been involved in the sport of rowing competitively at a reasonably high level, I used to make a few journeys to Ballarat and compete on Lake Wendouree. I am not sure whether that is still possible with the amount of water in the lake, but there are some other highlights within that town. It has a rich history, and probably no greater history than this magnificent memorial to the ex-POWs. I have seen pictures of the memorial in the Ballarat Botanical Gardens, and I hope to visit it one day. It is a magnificent structure and, as others have said, a memorial which provides ex-prisoners of war, their descendants, visitors and future generations with a place where they can pay their respects to those who endured so much as prisoners of war.

But there can be no denying that this memorial has a political history. Funds had been granted by the previous government—half a million dollars of the $1.9 million that was put into the memorial from all sources. It is not my intention to go back over which side of politics helped the local community to construct the memorial. But I will take my comments back to mid-2007 to put this matter in its true context. I understand that it was on 27 June last year that the then Leader of the Opposition visited Ballarat and promised that he would:

… move anything necessary to ensure that this is properly recognised as a national war memorial.

What does the talk of recognition and a national war memorial actually mean? Definitions are very important because under the National Memorials Ordinance 1928 the central issue is that recognition of a national memorial, or to call something a national memorial, can only occur for a memorial located in the ACT. Of course, that does not mean that there are not a great many very important memorials around the rest of the country. They are very important to people in the little towns and suburbs of this great country. We have to remember that, with regard to this specific memorial, the former government said that it could not be recognised as a national war memorial because the law required all national monuments to be located in the ACT. With $500,000 granted over a couple of periods by the former government, there was no doubt that there was a huge commitment by the former government. But, I repeat again, a national memorial had to be in the ACT. A national memorial would also attract maintenance funding, and I will come to that very soon. The previous government said it was clear that it could not be done. The ordinance was clear on the point that a national memorial had to be in the ACT, and if it was not, no maintenance funding could be allocated.

The Labor MP for Ballarat apparently got legal advice last year. She said that national monuments could be located outside Canberra, and no doubt a lot of people were very pleased with that information. The member for Ballarat had legal advice and the leader of the then opposition said he would move anything necessary to ensure that this was properly recognised as a national war memorial. So two significant people had promised the people of Ballarat, the veterans and the former POWs that their memorial would be recognised as a national war memorial, which, according to the 1928 ordinance, attracts funding for maintenance. That was in June 2007. So, game over, all done, vote for Labor and it would be so. Not quite, it would seem.

Earlier this year the new Minister for Veterans’ Affairs was in Ballarat where he announced that the federal government would introduce legislation allowing memorials outside Canberra to get national recognition. He also announced a $160,000 funding package over four years to help with the memorial’s upkeep. The reality therefore is that the former government was right—it could not be done—and the legal advice of the member for Ballarat was wrong. Fortunately, plenty of money was put up to get her and the new PM out of the mess. There was, of course, plenty of money due to the previous government’s sound economic management, which saw $96 billion of debt from the last government paid off. So Labor did not actually need that 1928 ordinance any more; they did not need that law because that law could not be applied. All they needed was a new law and a grant of $160,000. You basically ticked all the boxes for what the ordinance did in any case. So they created this bill and put up $160,000. And what did the minister say? He said, ‘It was part of our stated policy.’ So now we have history being rewritten—a new law is created, money is put up and it is all done and dusted again.

Fortunately, though, this memorial is a great memorial, as I said before, which the City of Ballarat and the local people are justifiably proud of. Even though this is not a national memorial, it will be recognised by this bill and it has been given a higher profile as a result. Maybe it has even encouraged more people to visit the memorial, and I think that is a great thing. I understand that over 1,000 people a week visit the memorial already. Ballarat is a very pretty city, there is a lot to see there, and this is another great addition to that great city. I do not know the specific words used in Ballarat by the Prime Minister when he was there last year. I do know that the Age newspaper reported that he promised that the memorial would be recognised as a national memorial if Labor won government. If those were the specific terms that he used, he was either misinformed or possibly deceived, or he either misinformed or deceived the people of Ballarat and the veterans’ community about the absolute status. Perhaps it is better to not concentrate on the motive or political manoeuvrings by the then opposition, because the people got what they wanted in the end, even if it is not strictly speaking a national memorial.

However, this has created a precedent for other memorials around the country to also achieve recognition of national significance and payments for maintenance. That brings me to the very fine electorate of Cowan over in Western Australia—

Michael Keenan (Stirling, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Hear, hear!

Luke Simpkins (Cowan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you. In my electorate we have two very fine war memorials. Of course, I am speaking about the Ballajura War Memorial and Peace Park and the Wanneroo War Memorial. I would like to spend a few minutes speaking about the Ballajura War Memorial because it was a very special project for the local community. Ballajura itself is arguably the second most popular suburb in Perth. It has four primary schools and a secondary school, which is the Ballajura Community College. On 3 May 2004, a decision was made by local individuals and organisations to undertake the development of the Ballajura War Memorial and Peace Park. The park itself is now located on the grounds of the Ballajura Community College. It was created using grants totalling $155,000 from the former federal government, the Howard government, and a $150,000 grant from the state government, as well as a significant donation by Mr Mark Creasy.

A number of individuals apart from Mr Creasy also need to be acknowledged for their part in the great project. I make mention of my predecessor Graham Edwards; Senator Chris Ellison; John D’Orazio MLA; Mayor Charlie Gregorini; deputy mayor and great local advocate for Ballajura Mr Mel Congerton; Mr Mike Foley, the CEO of the City of Swan; Dr Steffan Silcox, the highly regarded principal of Ballajura Community College; and not least, of course, the representatives of the Ballajura RSL sub-branch—guys like Scotty Alcorn and Roy Daniels—and the WA branch of the RSL. They and their staff worked very hard to see this project through to a great conclusion, with the official dedication of the memorial and park on 3 May 2006, two years after the original concept was created.

1 also mention that $125,000 of the Commonwealth’s contribution was via the Regional Partnerships program. The history of that grant was somewhat rocky, and in my ultimately successful attempt to persuade DOTARS and the Perth ACC that this was a good project I was supported with letters from local principals: Dr Silcox, Rob Stewart of Illawarra Primary School, Peter Smith of South Ballajura Primary School, Josh Jahari of Ballajura PrimarySchool and James Danaher of the Mary McKillop Catholic Community Primary School, along with several religious and other community leaders. They were there when the grant hung precariously in the balance and, together with their letters of support, we got it over the finish line.

The memorial and peace park is a magnificent example of design and decoration, commemorating and serving as a perpetual reminder of the service and sacrifice of Australians who have given their lives in war. Stepped grassed terraces, low limestone walls and rammed earth blocks are all set off by a one-tonne granite sphere turned by a spring of water. This is a magnificent structure, but it is the way the community came together and realised the vision that really underlies the true strength of the memorial, the park and ultimately the Ballajura community. The area has its fair share of problems like most suburbs in Australia but, despite the park not being fenced, it has never been vandalised: there is no graffiti at all. This is in sharp contrast to the remainder of the suburb which, unfortunately, in many ways is pretty typical of suburbs around the country. Given the way the park was created and built and the way it is held in the highest regard and with great respect by all members of the community, this is a very special place. I therefore feel that this is a memorial that could be considered of great significance.

I also speak of the Wanneroo War Memorial, just off Civic Drive in the town centre. Each year on Anzac Day the service draws more than 2,000 local people. The memorial is significant for local people not only on Anzac Day but also as a place for reflection throughout the year. I have previously made mention of the good work undertaken by the custodian of the memorial, Mr Doug Valerian. He raises the flags each day and ensures that the memorial is maintained.

Finally, I mention the Republic of Vietnam-Australia War Memorial in Kings Park in Perth. I recently attended the commemorative service for the anniversary of the fall of Saigon. It was clear to me that that memorial is of great significance to Australians of Vietnamese origin. These are the people that still feel the effects of the fall of Saigon and the demise of the Republic of Vietnam, also known as South Vietnam. With the fall of Saigon, the hopes of these residents of South Vietnam for a positive and democratic future were dashed and their hopes for political and religious freedoms were undone. The memorial therefore represents a focal point for a significant, long-term and persistent feeling for the loss of a democratic dream. The Vietnamese community in Western Australia has added great value to our state following the migrations of the 1970s and 1980s, and I thank the president of the community, Mr Nam Nguyen, for the work that Vietnamese Australians have done and will do in the future for our state. I have now mentioned two war memorials in Cowan and one in the Curtin electorate. It is my view that these memorials in Cowan and Curtin represent important and meaningful commemorative focal points for the community.

Having spoken on the important memorials to the people and communities of Cowan, I close by returning to the bill and the legislation before this House. On 19 March this year, the federal Minister for Veterans’ Affairs made an announcement regarding the matter. The media release said:

The Australian Government will soon be able to deliver on its election commitment to recognise the Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial in Ballarat as a memorial of national significance

…            …            …

Legislation was today introduced into the House of Representatives to enable the Minister for Veterans’ Affairs, with the written approval of the Prime Minister, to declare military memorials of national significance outside of the Australian Capital Territory.

When referring to the efforts of the local people in building the memorial, and failing to mention the significant grants provided by the previous government, the minister makes this astounding comment:

… the previous government refused to recognise the Ballarat memorial as a national memorial. We have … done this.

This is not true. This is in fact a charade consistent with the usual smoke and mirrors job that defines this government. The term ‘national memorial’ has a meaning within the 1928 ordinance: it means a memorial in the Australian Capital Territory. I know that it is convenient to attempt to pass this deception off in amongst many other paragraphs of this media release, but it is just not true. Further down the media release he gets back to the real term that this bill provides for the memorial in Ballarat, but even here there is another rewriting of history. He says:

I acknowledge the tireless efforts of Catherine King, the Member for Ballarat, to have the memorial recognised nationally as a memorial of significance.

I say that is wrong again. The Age article of 28 June 2007 states that Kevin Rudd promised to recognise the Ballarat prisoner-of-war memorial as a national memorial. I say again that the member for Ballarat was reported as saying that she had legal advice saying that a national memorial could be located outside Canberra. The key words are ‘national memorial’, which has a different meaning altogether than a ‘military memorial of national significance’. So this bill does not do as the minister says it will. Luckily, he rewrites history again by saying that the member for Ballarat called for the memorial to be a ‘military memorial of national significance’. This is not a matter of semantics; this is a salient and crucial issue regarding the facts. I say again that I have no problem with the magnificent and important memorial in Ballarat, but the government should just say that they were wrong about it being a national memorial. They should say that the previous government was right on this matter and apologise for being so misleading about the issue. The minister should come into the House and be accurate. He should say that they were wrong. He should say that the now Prime Minister was wrong when he said he would:

… move anything … to ensure that this is properly recognised as a national war memorial.

The minister should come in here and say that the member for Ballarat and her legal advisers were wrong. Perhaps they should all come in here and apologise to the member for Dunkley for saying that he was wrong last year. Alternatively, they can just rewrite history, try to play games with words and muddy the waters with legislative terms just to allow the Prime Minister and the member for Ballarat to save face. That is in fact what has taken place.

However, there is just one problem that this bill does not cover, and that is the maintenance issue. The problem is that national memorials, as defined under the National Memorials Ordinance 1928, are maintained by the Commonwealth. To cover that little gap in the whole cover-up job, what did the government do? It allocated $160,000 for maintenance—and thus, to them, the job was complete. What is this all about? Is this bill about looking after an important memorial, which the Ballarat war memorial certainly is? It is a national memorial of significance and it is very important to a lot of people in this country. There is no doubt about that. This bill is about covering up the reckless and uneducated talk by the now Prime Minister and the member for Ballarat. Instead of saying that it was not possible to make the memorial a national memorial, they just took the political advantage and said yes to that. Some may say that the then Leader of the Opposition did not know that national memorial can only be located in the ACT. But I do not think that is right because it is my understanding that the Leader of the Opposition in the House of Representatives is in fact a member of the Canberra National Memorials Committee.

This is really all about a government that will create new laws and allocate funding every time they cannot make their political plans fit within the existing laws. The next big examples of this sort of practice are probably the super slush funds and the 50 per cent increase in the issue of government bonds, which will generate another $25 billion. These are more funds that can be allocated by the committee set up by this government—and maybe they will not even create a new law next time. I finish on this note: the memorial in Ballarat is very important. It is impressive and no-one will speak against it. But the points I have made today are about the lengths to which this government will go to cover up their mistakes. With the precedent of these sorts of laws, our country has a scary future.

Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I found the contribution of the member for Cowan quite interesting. He argued against the Military Memorials of National Significance Bill 2008 but then he very quickly put up his hand for three more memorials to be made memorials of national significance—two in his electorate and one in the electorate of Curtin. His contribution demonstrates to me the differences between a national memorial such as the one in Ballarat and the two local memorials within his electorate. These memorials have a lot of community support and they sound like fantastic memorials, but they are local memorials, as opposed to the national memorial that will be established at Ballarat under this legislation.

This bill gives effect to a commitment given by the Rudd Labor government prior to the 2007 election to recognise the Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial in Ballarat in Victoria—and I emphasise ‘Australian’—as a memorial of national significance. In the future, this bill will also enable other significant memorials that meet specific criteria to be recognised as military memorials of national significance. I say to the member for Cowan that these memorials must be of national significance. A little later in my speech to the House, I will be putting up for consideration a memorial that I think is of national significance. I congratulate the member for Ballarat, Catherine King, who has worked tirelessly to see this legislation brought to the parliament. In her contribution to the parliament before she went on maternity leave, she pointed out that this memorial should be recognised as a national memorial, not because of the people in her electorate, not because of the enormous community support, but because it pays tribute to Australian ex-prisoners of war. It is not just for Australian ex-prisoners of war from her community but for all Australian ex-prisoners of war. Their names are recorded on this memorial, and that makes it very special.

I am disappointed that the previous government did not take the steps that the Rudd Labor government have taken today in introducing this or similar legislation. They had the opportunity, but not the will, to do so. I find that disappointing. Australian ex-prisoners of war made an enormous contribution to Australia’s war efforts. Once they returned to Australia, many of them were never the same again. The contributions that I have heard in this House today reinforce that point. This bill has very narrow criteria under which memorials can be recognised. I suggest once again that the member for Cowan have a look at those criteria, because he would then understand that a memorial of national significance really must have a national focus. Once again, I congratulate the member for Ballarat. She knows how important this is to Australian veterans, to our veteran community, to our community and for our recorded history.

The Military Memorials of National Significance Bill 2008 will provide a mechanism to honour our election commitment. It will provide a head of power to enable existing memorials to be granted the status of military memorials of national significance. The Minister for Veterans’ Affairs may, subject to the agreement of the Prime Minister, declare a memorial to be a military memorial of national significance by publishing a notice in the gazette.

Memorials must meet a number of very strict criteria, and I suggest that the member for Cowan have a look at those. The memorial must be of an appropriate scale, design and standard in keeping with its nationally significant status. The memorial must be appropriately dignified and symbolic in keeping with its purpose and standing as a war memorial. I know that members of this House have a number of war memorials within their electorates. At this point I would like to pay tribute to all the RSLs and all those people in my community who have worked hard to have their memorials built and upgraded. I know the dedication that they have to preserving those memorials and keeping them in outstanding condition.

Further criteria include that the memorial’s sole purpose must be the commemoration of Australia’s military involvement in significant aspects of Australia’s wartime history. The memorial must have a major role in community commemoration. The memorial must observe Commonwealth flag protocols. The memorial must be owned or managed by a state or Northern Territory authority. That state or Northern Territory authority must be responsible, including financially—and this goes to the point raised by the member for Cowan—for the ongoing maintenance of the memorial and its refurbishments. The memorial must comply with all applicable planning, construction and related requirements. The memorial must be located on public land within a state or territory. The memorial must be publicly accessible and entry must be free. The memorial must be a complete and functioning memorial. The memorial must not be linked to a commercial function that conflicts with the commemorative purpose and spirit of the memorial. The Ballarat memorial meets all those criteria, and I would like to put to the House another memorial that I think would meet those criteria.

Quite often we tend to forget the contribution that merchant mariners made to Australia’s war effort. Under the Hawke government recognition was given to merchant mariners and the contribution they made. The House may not be aware that many ships were sunk off the coast of Australia and that many merchant mariners lost their lives during the Second World War in particular. Australia is now learning about the vital role performed by merchant mariners.

The sinking of the MV Nimbin eight miles off Norah Head on 5 December 1940 was the first sinking of a ship off the coast of Australia. It was not the first Australian ship to sink; I will tell the House a bit about that later. The Nimbin and the Iron Chieftain were two of the 54 merchant ships attacked in Australian waters during World War II, of which 38 were sunk. I think some 26 ships were sunk off the eastern coast of New South Wales. About 14,000 Australian merchant mariners served during the Second World War. Every year on the first Saturday in December at Norah Head there is a memorial service at a memorial on the cliffs overlooking the ocean where those merchant mariners who lost their lives are remembered.

The Nimbin was attacked by the German raider the Pinguin. Seven mariners, including the master, William Bysantson, loss their lives and 13 other crewmen were dragged from the sea. The Nimbin became the first Australian ship to be sunk by German action off the east coast. That is a significant part of our military history and it is something of national significance, recognising the contribution that merchant mariners made to our war effort.

Almost 18 months later, some 35 miles south-east of Norah Head, at about 9 pm on 3 June, the Japanese submarine I-24 opened fire on Howard Smith’s steamer the Age. The Age escaped to the safety of the port of Newcastle. Ninety minutes later the I-24 torpedoed BHP’s Iron Chieftain. Thirteen mariners, including the master, Captain L Haddelsey, went down with the ship. Twelve survivors in two rafts were rescued and the remaining 25 survivors came ashore in a lifeboat.

This is very significant to our Australian military history and fits within the guidelines, and it does not require enormous contributions from government to recognise this as a national memorial. Just as the Ballarat memorial—which has been recognised in this legislation today due to the fine work of the member for Ballarat, the Minister for Veterans’ Affairs and the Prime Minister—has now been given the national status it deserves because of our ability to realise that you can have national memorials that are not situated within Canberra, just as that has been facilitated by this legislation, I would put to the House that the Merchant Mariners Memorial at Norah Head is a memorial that should be considered in the future. I have great pleasure in supporting this legislation, as I know do all members on this side of the House.

Steven Ciobo (Moncrieff, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Small Business, the Service Economy and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am pleased to speak to the Military Memorials of National Significance Bill 2008, and I do so having the great fortune of being the representative for the seat of Moncrieff based on the Gold Coast, a city that has one of the highest concentrations of veteran communities in Australia. This bill is important because it effectively seeks to establish a new classification of Australian military memorial—that is, the Military Memorial of National Significance. As is already on the record, the coalition support this bill, subject to the amendment moved by the member for Mackellar, the Hon. Bronwyn Bishop, the shadow minister for veterans’ affairs.

The components of the amendment that we seek to have incorporated into the bill deal with some of our concerns about the government’s attempts to play party politics with the veterans’ community, and the fact that in the budget papers the Rudd Labor government have said they have declared the Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial in Ballarat a national memorial when they have not done so. The fact is that there has been a misleading, in our view, of the veterans’ community by the Rudd Labor government, who claim to have met an election commitment to declare the Ballarat memorial a national memorial when in fact they have failed to do so. Effectively, this bill allows for special recognition of military memorials outside of Canberra, subject to the approval of the Minister for Veterans’ Affairs and the Prime Minister. The bill does not, however, allow for the Ballarat prisoner of war memorial to be established as a national memorial, as was promised by the Prime Minister in June 2007. So, in that respect, we believe this bill to be deficient.

But, speaking from a local perspective, speaking as a representative of one of the largest veteran communities in Australia, I am pleased that we are now paving the way for national recognition of national memorials outside the Canberra area. I have worked with a number of local community groups on key memorials that have been developed on the Gold Coast. In particular, I would mention the development of the Kokoda memorial. We know that the 39th Battalion played a fundamental and crucial role in the defence of our nation with respect to an offensive by the Japanese in Papua New Guinea. The Kokoda Track, as it is now known—some refer to it as the Kokoda Trail, but I have always preferred the Australian vernacular, the ‘Kokoda Track’—really became, in many respects, a renewal of the Anzac spirit. The 39th Battalion, fighting against the Japanese in Papua New Guinea along the Kokoda Track, faced some of the most hostile conditions imaginable.

I was certainly very pleased to work with George Friend OAM, especially. He, together with his local Rotary Club and others on the Gold Coast, worked for many years to develop this new memorial. I am not suggesting that this memorial should become a national memorial. Perhaps it will; perhaps it will not—we will see with the passage of time. But what is important is that Australia takes the time, as it does in many respects, to truly honour those in the veterans’ community and those who have passed away, and this bill goes to doing exactly that. The Kokoda memorial that is being developed currently on the Gold Coast has been, in many respects, a very effective way of recognising and honouring those men from the 39th Battalion. Bill Bellairs, a local Gold Coaster whom I have met with on many occasions specifically with respect to the Kokoda memorial, and one of the men who served with the 39th Battalion, was especially pleased to see the Kokoda memorial developed. It has really been a partnership between the Gold Coast City Council, the Queensland state government, the former Howard government and the local community. By bringing together all these groups, driven as it was by George Friend and as it continues to be driven by George Friend, the local community is truly creating something you can be proud of: a memorial for the local community to visit and to reflect on and consider the tremendous personal sacrifice that was made by the 39th Battalion in defending our nation of Australia.

Those gentlemen who are honoured by this memorial truly have made a remarkable difference and they deserve to be adequately recognised by this Kokoda memorial. But across the board there are many other examples in my electorate of significant military memorials, and these memorials do not glorify war. These memorials do not in any way condone some of the excesses that take place during wartimes. What they do is to provide an opportunity for the local community to come together and reflect on the contribution that has been made by veterans. They should be honoured.

I note as well that, in many respects, this bill also addresses the significant sacrifices that were made by those Australian troops who were engaged by the enemy and ultimately became prisoners of war. Between the Boer War, which for Australian troops commenced in November 1899, and the Korean War, where a ceasefire took place in July 1953, there were some 34,737 Australians who were captured by the enemy as prisoners of war. The previous coalition government gave special recognition to prisoners of war, with some 2,200 veterans who were held as POWs in Europe receiving a $10,000 ex gratia payment in last year’s budget at a cost to taxpayers of some $57.2 million. It was a contribution that the coalition felt very strongly about; a contribution that the coalition thought was appropriate for those who were held as prisoners of war, often in the most degrading and extraordinary circumstances—circumstances that many Australians would simply fail to comprehend.

Previously the coalition government also funded ex gratia payments for POWs of the Japanese and Korean theatres of war. In its first seven months the Rudd Labor government has failed to continue this same standard of recognition, falsely claiming to deliver the Ballarat POW memorial as a national memorial when it is not. I take this opportunity to reassert to the Rudd government that now is the time to stand true to that pre-election commitment and to acknowledge that this memorial should in fact be a national memorial. If there is one group of Australians who especially deserve and require due recognition, it is our POWs. The fact that some 35,000 Australians were captured and held by enemy forces throughout the various theatres of war in Australia’s history truly is worthy of recognition. Those who endured through those especially difficult times certainly require due recognition from the community, and this memorial is one way that we can go about doing that.

I would especially like to mention the Gold Coast and District Ex-Prisoner of War Association. I have enjoyed the strong relationship I have had with Allan Mahoney and others, especially Norm Anderton and Rhonda Apps, who are involved with the Gold Coast and District Ex-Prisoner of War Association and all of whom have played a key role in servicing the needs of that community on the Gold Coast. I find it particularly interesting that their motto is, ‘We honour our dead by caring for our living.’ This in many respects really goes to the core of this recognition of the contribution and sacrifice made by this community.

I convene on a semi-regular basis a veterans kitchen cabinet in my electorate office. It is a chance for veterans and ESOs to come together and sit around the table with me to discuss those issues important to the veteran community. This is not always confined to memorials. It is not always confined to the deliverance of payments, the Gold Card or other such issues. But what is clear—and I notice this especially on the Gold Coast—is that if there is one key yearning that comes from the veteran community I could sum it up in the simple word ‘recognition’. They yearn for recognition of the contribution they made, for recognition of the sacrifice they made and for recognition of what they did when their nation called upon them. There is a very genuine need to recognise these very brave Australians for what they did, not only by the men who served but also by the women who supported them and the family structures around them, as well in more recent times those of them who actually served. In that respect, I certainly subscribe to the motto of the Gold Coast and District Ex-Prisoner of War Association when they say, ‘We honour our dead by caring for our living.’

This bill before the House goes some way to doing that. I guess it is more of a commemorative recognition but nonetheless it is still a crucial part. Other members of the Gold Coast and District Ex-Prisoner of War Association such as Merv Cox, Marial Day, Norm Hutley and Noel Jensen are all active in the local community, and I look forward to when, in just a matter of a month or so, we will be holding another veterans kitchen cabinet in my office with Bronwyn Bishop, the shadow minister, coming up to talk about these and other such matters. I certainly look forward to this bill’s passage, I look forward—I hope—to the amendment being accepted by the government and I look forward in due course to seeing those worthy memorials being duly recognised as being national memorials of significance that are accessible to the community and that extend beyond the city of Canberra.

We can recognise veterans in other ways. Under the former coalition government I was pleased to see—and I trust this will continue under the new government—continuing ongoing recognition of our veterans through other avenues. On 5 March I was pleased to attend the sod turning of the new veterans centre at Nerang with Mal Wheat, who is state president of the Vietnam Veterans Federation. This initiative, due for completion in early 2009, was partly funded by the previous coalition government to an amount of around $52,000. But it was supported by the veteran community, showing that the pride of our veterans is a source of national inspiration. We must recognise that in a number of respects there have been veterans who have not been well served upon their return.

One of the key and most fundamental aspects that I look forward to recognising as part of the VVF’s work through the veterans centre at Nerang is that there will be veterans support for the veteran community. Those who served in a theatre of conflict, those who served in a time of war and those who fought in some of the most fierce battles in Vietnam find that when they return they have difficulty coping. In that respect, a hand that reaches out from the local veteran community in a non-threatening environment such as a veterans centre can often in some respects be the difference between veterans getting their lives back on track or, unfortunately from time to time, letting go because they cannot cope with the various pressures that they face. In that respect, both the government and the opposition need to be mindful of the fact that right at this moment we have our Defence Force serving in a variety of theatres around the world. Whether it is troops in Afghanistan or Iraq or, on a regional level, those involved in the RAMSI mission, we know that these men and women will be looking for support when they return. They will be looking for recognition as well, and to some extent this bill goes to that. But they will also be looking for support, and veterans centres, for example, are such a key part of that recognition.

I certainly support this bill. I hope that the amendment is accepted by the government. I look forward to ensuring that memorials such as the Kokoda memorial on the Gold Coast and others associated with the Nerang RSL, Surfers Paradise RSL and the Southport RSL can play their role as a rallying point for the community to collective join and honour the contribution and sacrifice made by those brave Australians who answered the call when their nation called upon them to help serve our interests abroad.

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Before calling the honourable member for Makin, I remind all honourable members that they ought to, under the standing orders, refer to other honourable members only by the name of their electorates.

Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I too rise to speak in support of the Military Memorials of National Significance Bill 2008. At the outset I congratulate the Minister for Veterans’ Affairs on introducing this bill, particularly because this bill establishes the Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial in Ballarat as a memorial of national significance. I also take the opportunity to acknowledge the work of the member for Ballarat, Cathy King.

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I remind the honourable member of what I just said; namely, that honourable members ought to be referred to only by the name of their electorate.

Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I acknowledge the work of the member for Ballarat in her tireless campaign for having the Ballarat memorial recognised in this way. In doing so, she has supported not only her local community but the veterans from all over Australia, including those that are currently serving in the defence forces.

Other speakers have spoken at length about the importance of military memorials right across Australia, and rightly so. It is interesting to hear speakers from both sides of this House acknowledge the significance that they have within their local communities. In communities all around Australia—be it in your own community or wherever you might travel—it is most likely that you will find a war memorial of one kind or another. When I am travelling through a town that is new to me and have the time, I will stop and have a look at the memorials and read the names that are inevitably inscribed on a plaque or on the memorial somewhere. Not only does this give me some insight into the service the people from that locality gave for this country but it tells me a lot about the local community itself. That memorial represents something to the family members, the friends and the locals. While sometimes it is only a relatively small memorial when you compare it with others, the reality is that for the local community that memorial is most significant. It is cared for and treated with the utmost reverence and respect which it deserves, because it is a permanent reminder of the ultimate commitment made for Australia by the men and women for whom that memorial was erected.

Over the years I have had occasion to work alongside and be associated with a number of veteran organisations in my local community. I refer specifically to the Tea Tree Gully and the Salisbury RSL branches, the Para district servicemen’s association and in particular the Para district sub-branch of the National Servicemen’s Association, the northern branch of the Vietnam Veterans Association, the Peter Badcoe Ex-military Rehabilitation Centre and the historical military vehicles museum group. All of these associations have over the years established one form of memorial or another in honour of the people they represent. In most cases I have been able to provide some assistance to them in doing that. Therefore, I understand the importance of these memorials to the local organisations. When you work with an organisation to have a memorial established you not only go through that painstaking process to get it established but understand the passion behind the efforts of those who ultimately are responsible for it being established.

Today I want to speak briefly about two of the organisations that I have had a longstanding relationship with and which I was able to assist along the way in the establishment of their memorials. I refer to the Para District National Servicemen’s Association of South Australia. Earlier the member for Braddon spoke at length about the National Servicemen’s Association and the need for a memorial to be established for them here in Canberra or someplace in Australia—I understand that it will be here in Canberra. I am also aware that our own local community made a contribution towards the establishment of that memorial.

The Para District National Servicemen’s Association was established some 10 years ago in the northern parts of Adelaide. On 13 September this year I hope to attend their 10th anniversary charter dinner, as I have attended their annual dinners almost every year since the establishment of the organisation. Several years ago they contacted me when I was the Mayor of Salisbury seeking my assistance in having a local memorial established to honour the national service men and women veterans in the northern suburbs of Adelaide. I was able to assist them and a memorial was established in Pitman Park in Salisbury. Each year a memorial service is held at that location. It is usually held in the first week of February. Again, I have been able to attend all of the services held there since the memorial was established. When you attend that service—and I have to say that it could be classed as a relatively low-key service—you understand the important meaning that the memorial has for the veterans associated with that memorial. I am not only pleased that I have been associated with these people; I am pleased that we have been able to establish a memorial for them, because many of them felt somewhat left out of other recognitions that have been provided to veterans in this country.

The second example I want to speak about is the Vietnam veterans memorial established in Montague Farm, which is a residential estate in the suburb of Pooraka. Montague Farm was a joint project between the state government and private enterprise and was established in the late eighties and early nineties. At the time of its establishment, Fred Pritchard, who was working for the state government, was the project manager. Fred Pritchard was also a Vietnam veteran. He came up with the idea of having all of the streets in the new estate named after Vietnam soldiers who were from or were based in South Australia and who went to Vietnam and lost their lives. With my assistance and that of the council, that idea was embraced, and all of the streets in that community are now named after those Vietnam veterans. More specifically, each street sign has a notation about the soldier it is named after. That gives visitors to the community some understanding of who the person was and why the street was named after them.

In addition to that there is in a reserve within the residential estate known as Henderson Square a specific memorial. A plaque on a stone has the names of all of the South Australians who served and were killed in Vietnam. In addition, last year there was a sculpture done to commemorate the Vietnam veterans of South Australia. The sculpture is referred to as the ‘Seeds of Attainment’. There are some seeds and there is a plant germinating from the seeds. It symbolises rising from the ground after fire. That very much goes hand in hand with the participation of our Vietnam vets in Vietnam. Each year we commemorate the Battle of Long Tan, where 18 Australians were killed and 21 were wounded. It is one of the most notable battles of the Vietnam War. An annual memorial service is held on this site. It is attended by people from all over South Australia and Australia because the memorial specifically remembers and honours those soldiers who served in Vietnam. Last year’s service was attended by a former member of this place, Mr Graham Edwards. It was also attended by Keith Payne, a Victoria Cross winner and I believe the most highly decorated Vietnam veteran in this country. Keith Payne originates from Queensland, but he attended the service last year at that memorial site. Further to that, the garden of a community facility in close proximity is also dedicated to the memory of the Vietnam veterans from South Australia.

I use those examples simply to highlight how each memorial is of the utmost significance to the families and the communities associated with those the memorial commemorates. This bill enables people from all around Australia to apply to have memorials classified as memorials of national significance. Like the previous speaker, I do not suggest that they all will or should be classified. It will depend on whether the local communities wish to submit an application and there are clear guidelines, but there will be an opportunity to have those memorials nationally recognised. That is so important. This bill effectively elevates the significance of memorials throughout our communities—and rightly so.

Through my association with the organisations I mentioned earlier, I have come to know, respect and value the service men and women of this country. I have spoken with them at length about their service to this country. I have also seen the impact that that service has had on them and, at times, their families. I understand how important it is for them to be recognised through the establishment of a memorial—a permanent reminder for future generations of the people who have served this country. That is extremely important. It is not a big ask, but it is a measure that communities can take. I believe it goes a long way to saying to those people, ‘We very much value, we very much appreciate and we thank you for the service you gave to this country.’ Through the memorials we are able to do that. This bill provides an opportunity for communities right around Australia to do that. Many communities have memorials that are very significant for one reason or another, and they can have those memorials nationally recognised. As a society, I believe the memorials enable us to collectively express our gratitude to, our acknowledgment of and our support for the men and women who served and serve our country. The bill makes it clear that there are guidelines to assess any application for the classification of a memorial as a memorial of national significance. It ensures that the Ballarat memorial—which was perhaps the one that precipitated this bill—can be recognised as a memorial of national significance. More importantly, the bill tells the Australian community at large that we value the efforts and the commitments of the men and women who have served this country in the past, who serve it today and who will serve it in the future.

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

I thank the member for Makin for his contribution to the Military Memorials of National Significance Bill 2008. It has been great to see the number of people who have spoken in this debate because of its importance. Of course, I welcome the opportunity to speak on this bill as it acknowledges the significance of the Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial in Ballarat. The member for Makin, I think, gave us ample reason why we should be supporting the legislation, but it does more than that of course: it creates an opportunity to give recognition to other significant memorials throughout the country and, as members would know, the bill delivers on another government election promise.

During a visit to Ballarat on 27 June last year, the Prime Minister committed to the recognition of the Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial as a national war memorial. This memorial was dedicated, as we know, in February 2004 and it recognises the bravery and sacrifice of more than 35,000 Australian prisoners of war held during the Boer War, World War I, World War II and the Korean War. Despite repeated requests, the previous government refused to recognise the Ballarat memorial as a national memorial. The current Prime Minister promised that, if Labor were elected, we would remedy this and ensure that the Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial in Ballarat would be declared a national memorial. This commitment was reaffirmed on the fourth anniversary of the memorial on 3 February this year by the Minister for Veterans’ Affairs, who set a date of midyear to achieve this outcome. So it is with this bill that we are seeking to achieve this goal and thereby fulfil the election commitment made by the Prime Minister in 2007. The bill also provides a stable, consistent and transparent vehicle for the future declaration of other deserving memorials which meet the criteria set out. Under this bill, the Minister for Veterans’ Affairs will be able to deal with this and other memorials in a different way.

Australia has a very rich tradition of memorialising those who have served in wars. I think it is fair to say that Australians probably have more memorials to those who have fallen in serving their country per head of population than perhaps any other country. As Professor Ken Inglis acknowledges in his book Sacred Places, war memorials have long been a feature of the civilised world. Professor Inglis cites all the monuments and triumphal arches of Europe in particular which litter the landscape and which remain as historic reminders of past victories and triumphs. They are in fact monuments to power and glory, in many cases vested in an individual but with mighty nationalistic overtones. Importantly, this is not what war memorials represent here in Australia. War memorials here in Australia are about loss—loss of life, life wasted, lives to be remembered. While it is true they may be dedicated by a politician with some small moment of glory, they nevertheless reflect a common respect for those who died in battle. Whether it was the Boer War, World War I, the Second World War, the Korean War, Vietnam or any of the peacekeeping operations, these memorials all perform the same purpose. As well as recognising loss, bravery and commitment to the defence of our nation or our national interest, they symbolise a collective bond between the people who served.

So memorials in Australia are not about the glory of war and victory. They are about people. They are also about community. There are very few towns in this country which do not have war memorials with the names of the local community members whose lives have been lost in one or other of the many wars that we have fought in over the period since Federation. Mr Deputy Speaker, when you look at the list of names on these war memorials, most evidently when you look at the First World War memorials, you know that in a community where people joined up together they lost their lives together. Families can be seen to have had two or three sons—perhaps even more on some occasions—or cousins who died as a result of conflict and who are commemorated in the memorials in their local community. It is a sign of the need for the community to understand and recognise the sacrifice while at the same time giving those who have paid the ultimate sacrifice the honour that they properly deserve.

If you look at Anzac Parade here in Canberra, you will see that the memorials are about people. Here there are memorials to campaigns, but there are also memorials to the people—to the Air Force, for example, or to the nurses. The difficulty, however, is that throughout our history there has been a mix of local commemoration and national commemoration, which features as a major tension in this piece of legislation. As I said earlier, around Australia every community of any size after the First World War in 1918 erected a monument at a prime site which became the focal point on Anzac Day and remains so.

In addition, local shrines were erected in larger cities by the local community and remain jealously guarded by those communities—as they should be. They paid for their erection and they continue to pay for their maintenance. That responsibility is reinforced in this bill. It should be understood, however, that this is not some kind of power struggle. It is simply a fact that many local communities continue to jealously defend their local commemorative contribution. And we realise that an increasing number of local communities, especially in rural areas, have shrinking populations and find it extremely difficult to, or can no longer, honour that commitment which they once made.

Sadly, the demise of RSL communities in many areas has seen that support eroded. Nevertheless, commemoration remains a community based phenomenon—and governments have been keen in recent years to assist that for the benefit of their own profiles—and a respected and necessary tradition. The ex-POW memorial in Ballarat is an excellent case in point. There can be no doubt about the origins of this project. It came from the ex-POWs themselves. They properly consider themselves a national homogenous group of people, all of whom suffered at the hands of their captors. Sadly, there are none left from World War I, although there are some remaining from World War II and a small number from Korea. They decided to commemorate their joint identity with this memorial, reflecting in part the community spirit of the city of Ballarat, which we all know has prided itself for almost 100 years on its Memorial Drive leading into the city in honour of all the local lives lost.

Such avenues exist elsewhere as well. Kings Park in Perth is an outstanding example. Indeed, when I am in Perth I make a point of visiting the memorials in Kings Park, in particular the memorials to the 2nd/2nd Commandos from the Second World War whose lives were lost in Timor and New Guinea. I do that because it was the unit in which my father fought. In the context of the ex-POW memorial, it was a very ambitious project. The design, though magnificent, was expensive and, even though the local council recognised the attractive power it offered the local economy, they found it financially difficult to support. Thereafter, we witnessed an unseemly political bidding war, in election terms, about how to provide Commonwealth funding, not just in one-off grants but in perpetuity. Hence we have this bill which seeks to settle the issue that the Commonwealth has responsibility for funding memorials which are community based. Let me make it very clear that the community effort in building memorials is a valuable contribution and, quite frankly, it would be most improper if government sought to usurp this motivation. We must also remember that, in days past, military units were locally based and, as I pointed out earlier, local boys joined up together, fought together and died together.

The battle of Fromelles, which I have acquainted the House with over the last couple of weeks, is a good example. The Friends of the 15th Brigade are Victorian based. The four battalions in that brigade were recruited from Melbourne and rural Victoria. They were almost completely wiped out on the night of 19 October 1916 on the Sugar Loaf Salient. Every year, on that date, a service is held at the shrine, with the local French community, to remember the awful loss, with a bugler playing the last post at each of the four plaques under those beautiful oak trees. As I mentioned yesterday, on 19 July this year there will be an unveiling of a replica of the ‘Cobbers’ statue in the gardens nearby. The point here is that this statue was funded by public subscription, so it becomes the responsibility of the shrine. It represents local loss and grief, but clearly with national ramifications. Frankly, I think it is of enormous benefit and a wonderful thing that this tradition continues at the grassroots level—and it should remain so for any other local group and indeed unit associations.

Of course there is separation between a financial contribution and ongoing responsibility but, in short, I think we have the balance right—though from time to time there will be a unique set of circumstances in which we will need to be flexible. I know we would all want to commend the motivation of the ex-POW associations, just as we would commend the Friends of the 15th Brigade. This is about Australians remembering their own. It is not about fanfare and the cutting of ribbons in a one-off photo opportunity. There is an ongoing Commonwealth responsibility, and that is clear. Anzac Parade in Canberra is a key example and so are the monuments overseas—on the Western Front, in North Africa, in London and wherever we were involved as a nation and our heroes are buried. I know that my colleague opposite has an interest in this subject.

I want to speak about two memorials which I have been fortunate enough to attend since becoming Minister for Defence Science and Personnel—the commemorations for Sydney in April of this year, and the Dare Memorial in Timor-Leste, which is perhaps outside the scope of the legislation but still relevant as a military memorial of national significance. I will turn first to the Sydney.

As we all know, the wreck of the Sydney was found on the 16 March 2008, a few days after the Kormoran on 12 March 2008. The discovery of the Sydney’s final resting place means an enormous amount to not just the families of those 645 men who lost their lives but also the Australians for whom their lives were given. This loss of life, like all those lives lost in war, was a tragedy. Every one of the lost men of the Sydney left behind family—children they never saw grow up, mothers who outlived their sons. Two services were held to mark this tragic loss of life, services which were befitting its importance to Australia.

On 16 April 2008, a small service was held at sea on board HMAS Anzac. This included the laying of wreaths and a 4.5 inch brass shell, inscribed with the names of all 645 men lost, over the wreck site. Then, on the eve of Anzac Day on 24 April, an open service was held at St Andrew’s Cathedral in Sydney. It was a solemn and moving affair. St Andrew’s Cathedral was where the commemorative service was held during the Second World War after it became known that the Sydney had been lost. More than 770 relatives of the HMAS Sydney II—from all over Australia—attended the service. For them, it was a chance to say goodbye. The church was at full capacity and more people were able to watch the service via a large screen in Sydney Square. A further service is planned for later in the year, in November, to ensure that these brave Australians are properly remembered. This will involve both another commemoration at sea and a land commemoration.

The loss of life on the Sydney is commemorated in the Sydney memorial in Geraldton. It is beautiful and poignant, situated on Mount Scott, overlooking the town. It is a fantastic memorial. It was designed by Joan Walsh-Smith and Charles Smith. The Smiths have designed a number of other Australian memorials, including the Australian Army memorial on Anzac Parade leading to the Australian War Memorial. When it was officially opened in 2001, more than 3,000 people attended, including German survivors from the Kormoran.

The memorial consists of an impressive silver dome—the Dome of Souls—in the form of 645 seagulls in flight, to represent each of the lost Sydney sailors. An anchor is suspended from the middle of the dome and the structure rests on white pillars. To the north of the dome, a bronze statue of a woman gazes desperately out to sea as she awaits news of the ill-fated Sydney. Nearby is the stele—a single, dramatic shape representing the bow of the ship. The combination of these elements results in an extremely moving and fitting memorial. This bill provides the perfect avenue to recognise the Sydney memorial as it should be recognised. Geraldton is perfect as a site for a memorial of national significance.

On Anzac Day, I was fortunate enough to be in Dare, 10 kilometres south of Dili. The Dare war memorial was built by members of the 2nd/2nd Independent Company, later to become the 2nd/2nd Commandos in 1969. During World War II, members of this company, plus remnants of the Tasmanian 2nd/40th Battalion and reinforced later by the 2nd/4th Independent Company, later Commandos, served as a guerrilla force against advancing Japanese forces across Timor. Their success was only made possible by the support they received from the local Timorese—the ‘criados’. The Anzac Day service was an extremely moving affair. In attendance were a member of the 2nd/2nd Battalion and a mate of my father’s, Paddy Keneally, and the last Timorese World War II veteran Rufino Alvez, who planted a figtree to act as a living memorial.

I want to affirm how important these memorials are and the privilege I have had, in my current role in this government, in observing the diligence with which members of the Defence Force and indeed the wider community have undertaken the role of reinforcing our obligations to the fallen—it is not to be underestimated. I am really appreciative of it. I commend the bill to the House.

James Bidgood (Dawson, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I stand in support of the Military Memorials of National Significance Bill 2008. I note that it provides a stable, consistent and transparent vehicle for the future declaration of other deserving memorials, as well as the memorial in Ballarat in Victoria. As a reminder of what is important about a memorial, the following criteria are required for it to be declared a military memorial of national significance. Firstly, the memorial must be of an appropriate scale, design and standard, in keeping with the nationally significant status. The memorial must be appropriately dignified and symbolic, in keeping with its purposes and standing as a memorial. The memorial’s sole purpose must be the commemoration of Australia’s military involvement in a significant aspect of Australia’s wartime history. The memorial must have a major role in community commemorations. The memorial must observe Commonwealth flag protocols. The memorial must be owned or managed by a state or Northern Territory authority. The state or Northern Territory authority must be responsible, including financially, for the ongoing maintenance of the memorial and for any refurbishments. The memorial must comply with all applicable planning, construction and related requirements. The memorial must be located on public land within a state or the Northern Territory. The memorial must be publicly accessible and entry must be free. The memorial must be a completed and functioning memorial. And the memorial must not be linked to a commercial function that conflicts with the commemorative purpose and spirit of the memorial.

It has been a wonderful experience being the federal member of parliament for Dawson. When I was going around the electorate on Anzac Day it was good to see children remembering the history of the nation and the sacrifice of lives in standing up for what this nation believes in—its freedoms, rights and liberties, which have often been fought for overseas. It is good for our children to remember that history and that they seek to learn from past experiences so that we progress and, hopefully, do things better in the future.

I bring to the attention of the House something that is happening in my electorate of Dawson. Mackay North State High School is having a 2008 Anzac Gallipoli tour. I went to the opening of a memorial, along with the Mackay regional mayor, Mr Col Meng, and the state member for Mackay, Mr Tim Mulherin. It is wonderful to see schoolchildren actively engage in creating and constructing memorials where they can remember our military history. I give credit to the teachers who helped to organise this—Mr Mike Goodwin, Bob Shaw, Principal Linda Boyle, Cheryl Johns, Tracey Cameron and Sherry Savage—and the 30 students making the tour to visit Australian military memorials at Gallipoli, the Western Front, Thailand and Singapore this year. They will also be visiting parliament in a couple of weeks time, and I look forward to receiving them and showing them around this place. At this wonderful memorial that has been built they have created a special eating area where the children and the students can go and eat their lunch or have a smoko. Some railway track has been built to remember the Thai railway and there is also some bamboo. Some artefacts have also been put there. At the very moving opening ceremony, a descendant was introduced to us—he was one of the prisoners of war—and we were able to say, ‘We remember and we won’t forget.’ That was very important. Mackay North State High School has done a great thing. The teachers and the principal there deserve recognition and credit for their initiative. I am pleased to say that on Sunday, 29 June the Prime Minister and the federal cabinet will be at that school. It will give me great pleasure to show them this place where the students remember Australian military history and the sacrifices that were made in defending our beliefs, rights and freedoms and the causes that have been fought for by Australians.

I also bring attention to other war memorials in the seat of Dawson. One that is of particular interest and perhaps slightly unique is the Mackay City Council Memorial Swimming Pool in the heart of Mackay. It was built after the Second World War and there is a beautiful mosaic of all the servicepeople returning from the Second World War. The citizens of Mackay rallied around with passion and feeling and raised the money to build this memorial. It stands there today and it truly is a war memorial. Every time someone goes in for a swim you have to pass this mosaic that is most beautiful.

Another memorial we have in Mackay is in Queens Park. It is a more recent memorial and it is dedicated to the Rats of Tobruk. Again, ceremonies take place there when we remember the sacrifices that were made. Another more recently constructed war memorial is one dedicated to the Vietnam veterans, which is in the Mackay City Council precinct known as Jubilee Park. That is where we meet on Anzac Day at 5 am. That is where we remember those who have fallen in defence of the beliefs of this country. It was an honour to be at that 5 am service and to be there with the old diggers and, obviously, to go to the local RSL afterwards and have a bit of brekkie and to mix with people there and to ask them how they got their medals and to hear some of their stories and to hear about the comradeship. We as members of parliament should never, ever underestimate how much the old diggers appreciate our showing recognition of and appreciation for what they have done for this country. We should never forget that. That morning I went from Mackay up to the Whitsundays. Over 500 people gathered on beautiful Airlie Beach and we remembered those who had fallen. After speaking there, some Vietnam veterans came up to me and said, ‘Thank you for coming, thank you for taking the time, thank you for remembering us but, most of all, thank you for being proud of what we did for this country.’ It is important that we show recognition and appreciation.

I went from Proserpine up to Bowen in the afternoon and I spoke at the RSL dinner. There were over 100 people there. I said very clearly to everyone gathered—and I feel very strongly about this—that we must remember the fallen and we must look after those who remain but, most of all, we should pray for all those in active service now. Whether they be in a conflict zone, in support roles or on peacekeeping missions, they are serving this country. We are proud of our men and women in uniform, whatever their role. They are serving this nation and there is no greater honour than to serve this nation.

It has also been a great honour to represent the people of Dawson and those in uniform who come from the electorate of Dawson. Recently I was given the honour on Anzac Sunday of representing the Minister for Defence, Joel Fitzgibbon, in Townsville to receive home troops from East Timor. It was the first time I had done something like that. Brigadier John Caligari gave me a word of advice. He said: ‘You’ve not done this before. These troops that are coming back had only been out of training for six months when they went overseas and performed with absolute excellence. The average age of these troops is around 19, so you might be a little bit surprised by their youthfulness.’ He may have said that because he was looking at me! I shook hands with every single one who came through. I looked into their eyes and said: ‘Welcome home. We are proud of you.’ I said that to over 100 troops. It was a pleasure and an honour to say on behalf of this government and this nation, for all people: ‘Welcome home. We are proud of you.’ We must never again have a welcome home like that which befell those who came back from Vietnam. Never again must that happen. Whatever the reasons for people going into a conflict situation, we must show recognition and appreciation that these men and women in uniform serve our country. They do so in the most professional manner and with integrity. We should always give them the honour and respect that they deserve. More recently, I received troops home on Monday. The Army Aviation Corps came back and, again, it was an honour and pleasure to shake every single hand and say on behalf of the Prime Minister and the Minister for Defence: ‘We are proud of you. Welcome home. You have served your country well.’

With those thoughts in mind, the role of memorials in remembering the past is very important. They are important for teaching future generations of our children that we must learn lessons from the past if we are to progress as a society and the way that we do business overseas in defence of the principles, beliefs and territories of this nation. We should also take on board that memorials are not just for those who have fallen. There are people left standing, and some who cannot stand, and we must look after those who remain. We must show them dignity for their sacrifice. Some of them are suffering appalling injuries. We must look after them. They must not live in poverty. They must not suffer due to lack of health care. We owe these men and women in uniform every respect in the provision of their needs, whatever the political colour of the government may be. We must never forget to pray for the protection of those in active service now. With those thoughts, I conclude, and I commend this bill to the House.

Mark Dreyfus (Isaacs, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to support the Military Memorials of National Significance Bill 2008. This bill serves two purposes: it enables the recognition of the Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial in Ballarat as a memorial of national significance and it provides us with a mechanism for recognising other memorials as nationally significant. This bill, as other speakers have commented, is the fulfilment of an election commitment to the Australian ex-prisoners of war community. During a visit to Ballarat on 27 June 2007 the Prime Minister, the then opposition leader, committed to the recognition of the Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial as a nationally significant war memorial.

As the House has heard from other members, the memorial in Ballarat was dedicated in February 2004. It is a memorial to recognise the bravery and sacrifice of more than 35,000 Australian prisoners of war held during the Boer War, the two world wars and the Korean War. The question of the level of recognition to be given to this memorial in Ballarat has regrettably been the subject of considerable discussion for several years. There were repeated requests made of the former government for the Ballarat memorial to be recognised as a national memorial, but, as the minister said in introducing this bill, that was something which did not occur.

Labor promised that, if elected, we would remedy the omission and ensure that the Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial in Ballarat was in fact declared to be a national memorial. The Minister for Veterans’ Affairs confirmed this commitment at the fourth anniversary of the memorial on 3 February 2008 and set a date of mid year to achieve this outcome. With the passage of this bill, it will be possible to meet that more recent commitment.

All memorials to war and to loss are in some way significant. Memorials can be important to local communities. They can be important to the nation. Memorials like the Hiroshima Peace Memorial—recently visited by our Prime Minister, as the first Western leader to visit the memorial—or perhaps, as another example, the Yad Vashem memorial in Jerusalem, the memorial to Jews who perished in the Holocaust, are of significance to the world community. Certainly all Australians would be conscious of memorials in all shapes and sizes because, since the 19th century, communities have erected memorials to those who served in the many wars that have been fought since the 19th century, starting with the conflict in South Africa.

As someone who grew up in Melbourne, I was very conscious of the Shrine of Remembrance, because it occupies a very special place in a physical sense in the city of Melbourne, located as it is at the end of what is known as the shrine vista, looking down the length of Swanson Street and into St Kilda Road to where the shrine stands. I first visited the Shrine of Remembrance in Melbourne as a primary school student and to me, as someone then aged seven or eight, it was an awe-inspiring and mysterious place, using as it does Athenian classical architecture and occupying the huge space that it does. Even to a very young person, it is apparent that it is a special place, a place with a message.

The mystery of the place was perhaps acknowledged by those who built it, because carved into its grey granite walls are these words: ‘Let all men know that this is holy ground. This shrine, established in the hearts of men as on the solid earth, commemorates a people’s fortitude and sacrifice. Ye that come after give remembrance.’ Perhaps the builders of the Shrine of Remembrance in Melbourne felt it necessary, recognising that the shrine was going to be there for hundreds of years to come—certainly that was their intention—to ensure that, even after all those who have been associated with the conflict for which the shrine was built to remember had passed, the message was there inscribed on the wall to remind all who saw the shrine what its purpose was.

We see very large monuments of a scale similar to that shrine in all Australian capital cities, but as well we see, perhaps more significantly, local memorials in every Australian town and in every Australian suburb that existed at the time of the First World War and, going forward, in the 1920s and 1930s. It is significant indeed that some of the local memorials that still stand across Australia were built as early as before the end of the First World War, in something of a rush to erect this kind of memorial. The large memorials that we see in the capital cities were often built a great deal later, the Shrine of Remembrance not being completed until well over a decade after the First World War had ended.

In his very fine book Sacred Places: War Memorials in the Australian Landscape, Ken Inglis details what he describes as ‘the war memorial movement’, which saw the erection of these memorials across the country, starting, as I said, during the First World War and continuing through the 1920s and into the 1930s. He makes the point in his book that the term ‘war memorial’ was itself a novel one. In the monuments that were erected for the South African war, the constructions tended to be referred to as ‘fallen soldiers monuments’ or ‘soldiers monuments’, but after 1918 the term ‘war memorial’ became the common one. In Ken Inglis’s words, the memorials were ‘created to stand as a community’s statement of bereavement, pride and thanksgiving’. In those multiple purposes one can see the acknowledgement that memorials do indeed serve different purposes. Their function as a statement of bereavement is one which passes, perhaps, in time as those who are bereaved pass with the passing of time, but certainly the other purposes of pride and thanksgiving remain, as does the larger purpose of remembering for national purposes the sacrifices of those who are remembered.

The memorials across Australia, large and small, take many different forms. There are columns, obelisks, arches, statues of standing soldiers—the digger on the pedestal is a familiar form—and sometimes female figures. They use different materials: sometimes they are made of local stone; sometimes they use imported marble—like the little white soldier on the banks of the Patterson River in Carrum in my electorate. In every community these memorials are a focus for Anzac Day ceremonies. Certainly in the communities in my electorate of Isaacs we have a number of memorials that are significant to those local communities: at Carrum—the little white soldier I mentioned—at Edithvale, Cheltenham, Dandenong, Noble Park, Mordialloc and Mentone. This frequency of memorials in my electorate is one that is replicated right across Australia. Indeed we have heard reference from very many members during the debate on this bill to war memorials erected in their electorates and to the significance that those memorials bear.

Those memorials were often erected by local communities, very frequently to remember the members of those local communities who perished or who served in the wars that they commemorate. Just as we remember as communities, so as a nation we also remember. That is the purpose of memorials. We remember the sons and brothers, fathers and uncles, sisters, daughters, mothers and aunts who served our country. We remember for many reasons. We remember them for their actions, for their bravery, for their sacrifices and for their suffering. Remembering also helps us to understand where we have come from as a nation and how we arrived at the place where we now are, and part of remembering also is mourning—mourning the lives lost and the potential unfulfilled.

As the House has heard from other speakers on this bill, the memorial at Ballarat to Australian prisoners of war is a unique memorial. It is a memorial which serves a very special purpose in commemorating the service of Australian prisoners of war who served in the conflicts during the Boer War, the two world wars and the Korean War. As has been noted, between those wars—from the Boer War at the turn of the 20th century to the Korean War in the 1950s—some 35,000 Australian service men and women were incarcerated in prisoner of war camps. Many suffered atrocious and inhumane treatment at the hands of their captors. The Ballarat memorial is dedicated to these Australians in recognition of the pain and suffering that they endured in the service of our nation.

The memorial is in the botanical gardens in Ballarat. It is a monument that was designed by the well-known sculptor Peter Blizzard, and it is intended to provide ex-prisoners of war, their descendants and all other visitors in future generations with what has been described as a reflective experience, where they can pay homage to those who endured as did the prisoners of war. The design of the monument—and I would encourage anyone who can to visit it—uses the basic idea of a journey and an experience of time and place. The pathway is long and straight, heading off into the shape of railway sleepers—which is a reference to the Burma railway—and running parallel to the pathway is a polished black granite wall, 130 metres long, etched with the 35,000 names of all the Australian prisoners of war. Standing in a reflective pool are some huge basalt obelisks, up to 4.5 metres high, on which are the names of the prisoner of war camps. The columns are out of reach and across the water—which symbolises that all of the prisoner of war camps were away from Australian shores. Further on there is another wall with the words ‘Lest we forget’ engraved, allowing for an area of contemplation and reflection after the symbolic journey that the monument is designed to represent.

There is a particular reason why we should remember the experiences of prisoners of war. The experience of prisoners of war, of the men and women serving this country who were captured by our enemies in these various wars, was in almost all cases an experience of great privation, suffering and pain. The generation of Australians who were imprisoned by the Japanese during the Second World War is now passing, but the memory of their experiences has been passed to subsequent generations of Australians, including me. I had the good fortune to be taught English by Gordon Owen, who shared with me and the other members of our English class during the last three years of my secondary education his experiences as a prisoner of war of the Japanese in Changi and later in the war in Japan itself—some prisoners who had been captured at the fall of Singapore spent part of the war as prisoners in Changi and then were later moved to Japan. His descriptions of his experience as a prisoner of war, an experience that he shared with many thousands of Australian service men and women, were horrific. They were descriptions of starvation, of torture, of beatings, of the cruellest possible treatment that it is possible to imagine a human being can hand out to another human being. His descriptions of that wartime experience have stayed with me always.

When I hear people speak of war, the descriptions that he gave are a wonderful antidote to any notion of the glory of war or any notion other than that war is a dreadful experience. This bill, in enabling the recognition of the Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial in Ballarat as a memorial of national significance and enabling, within narrow criteria, the possible recognition of other nationally significant memorials, is a very worthwhile piece of legislation. I commend the bill to the House.

Laurie Ferguson (Reid, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Multicultural Affairs and Settlement Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have genuine pleasure in speaking on the Military Memorials of National Significance Bill 2008. That renowned national publication Laurie Ferguson’s Reid report rarely moves beyond the parochial, but the front page of its last edition concerned the Ballarat memorial. That is possibly because of a few connections with the genesis of this memorial.

As people might be aware, my predecessor, Tom Uren, was a prisoner on the Burma railway and has recounted his comradeship with Sir John Carrick, Weary Dunlop and others. For him that experience of the Second World War was also instrumental in forming his political beliefs and life. Many times he compared the experience of the British with that of the Australians, with regard to the death rates, the onset of cholera and dysentery and so on. He attributed the Australian survival rate not only to the leadership of Dunlop but also to the sense of common purpose and the degree of egalitarianism that characterised the way the Australians operated as opposed to the British, where it was very much about hierarchical structures—those at the top had no interest in those below. That is one connection.

The reason I mentioned this in my last newsletter is that there is another local connection. When Tom Uren’s brother-in-law, Bill Palmer, along with Bill Dircks discovered the Japanese surrender in Changi three days after the event, they constructed an Australian flag out of Japanese mosquito netting, pieces of canvas from an old army kit bag, hessian et cetera and hoisted it after reveille that day. That memorial flag is now in the Australian War Memorial. It was indicative of the perseverance and ingenuity of Australians who were captured during that period. I will refer again later to Uren in relation to another memorial in my electorate.

My wife’s uncle, Noel Keith Walsh, of Indigenous background, was another person who experienced Japanese incarceration during the Second World War. As for so many other Australians, this was an enduring hardship for the rest of his life, undermining his employability and basically destroying a lot of his future life experience. So I am pleased for those more personal reasons to speak on this bill.

As other speakers have indicated, the bill provides a mechanism that will enable a memorial located outside the Australian Capital Territory which meets specified criteria to be recognised as a military memorial of national significance. Other speakers have referred to the National Memorials Ordinance 1928, which says that, whilst they might be deemed national in character, memorials outside of national land could not be designated national war memorials.

There has been much quibbling; there has been much utilisation of semantics here in this debate to basically belittle what has been accomplished by this process. As other speakers, and the member for Shortland in particular, have mentioned, it is interesting to note people complaining, quibbling and undermining this initiative but at the same time hoping that the monuments in their electorates could be included. They are all coming forward proffering the joys of this particular monument—the colours, the stone et cetera—and indicating a desire for the legislation to be extended to memorials in their areas. At the same time they spend their whole time undermining what the Prime Minister and the government have accomplished.

So we have this new monument in Ballarat Botanical Gardens. Others have mentioned initiatives by Senator Ronaldson and the current member for Ballarat along the road to getting here and the devotion of $160,000 towards the project and its upkeep. So I say that it is no mean accomplishment that we have found a way to increase and enhance the importance of a number of memorials beyond the normal, localised monuments in so many country towns and suburbs of this nation.

Returning to my electorate, one of our important local sites is the war memorial at the Guildford School of Arts. Last night, I googled that building—and I am on its management board, as is the former state member for Granville Kim Yeadon, although he has moved many hundreds of kilometres from the electorate—and it is interesting that one of the references was to an interview, a very extensive, seminal interview, in January 1996 with Tom Uren about his life experiences, conducted by Robin Hughes. In the interview, Tom Uren says:

… her grandfather—

that is, his wife’s—

had been a person of some eminence in the district, he was the man that laid the foundation stone of the school of arts many years before …

And he went on to say that his wife’s family was on the conservative side of politics. So he was talking there about the establishment of the memorial school of arts back in the 1920s. The school is a local institution which has sufficed as the suburb’s war memorial following the demise of the RSL a decade or two ago. It is a venue which is utilised by a large number of local organisations, particularly groups that cannot afford the plusher halls in our electorate. It is also the site of a permanent booking by the Scottish heritage association.

The school commemorates the numbers of soldiers from the suburb of Guildford who fought in both world wars. There is also a separate monument for the people who went down in the Centaur when that was bombed by the Japanese. I mentioned the continued role of the Palmer family—as I said earlier, Tom Uren’s brother-in-law Bill was on the management committee of this organisation for many years and, indeed, Bill’s grandfather, Mr Milligan, had been instrumental in raising the money through tennis games, fetes et cetera over many years to dedicate this hall in 1933. That is one of a diverse range of monuments in our electorate.

Some speakers have alluded to the treatment of Vietnam veterans on their return to Australia. Our area could not be accused of being unwelcoming to Vietnam veterans—despite the fact that the electorate of Reid and its Labor Party organisation were amongst the strongest opponents of the war, led of course by Tom Uren throughout that period—because, for all the people who talk of shame, the Merrylands RSL Club probably led the country with regard to the inclusion of Vietnam veterans in the organisation. I went there last Saturday night, to their 50th anniversary, and there is a very significant presence of people from the Vietnam War on the management of that club. That is connected, of course, to the presence of the Vietnam Veterans Association about 150 metres from my electoral office—people like Tim McCoomb and of course John Haines, the former mayor of Parramatta. John Haines, having served in Vietnam, played a major role in establishing a sister-city relationship between Parramatta and a region of Vietnam. He is constantly endeavouring to increase understanding between Vietnam and Australia and never ceases to take initiatives to provide equipment and help to that Vietnamese area. So it is no wonder that Merrylands RSL perhaps led the nation in the inclusion of Vietnam veterans and the provision of a home for them, with the presence so nearby, in Granville, of the national headquarters of the association.

Also in my electorate, in Blaxcell Street, Granville, behind the Granville Youth Club, there is a monument with two artillery shells, a large rock and a memorial plaque to Vietnam War veterans. There is another monument nearby at the Granville RSL Club dedicated to Phil Thompson, former National President of the Vietnam Veterans Association of Australia, who passed away in November 1986. These memorials throughout my electorate are all very different but they do all have the theme of remembering suffering, remembering endurance—making sure that we recall that suffering but also the continuing experiences of the families involved.

St Stephen’s Anglican Church in Lidcombe has been the site for many years of an annual service in remembrance of war. I have always been intrigued by the now very old plaques along the wall of that church, referring to individual soldiers who perished overseas in what would have then been very exotic sites—for example, Sierra Leone during the Second World War; someone obviously died of disease on the way to or from Europe. All of those people are incorporated around the walls in what is again, like the Guildford School of Arts, a war memorial site. Obviously, with the passing of time, it has been very difficult to retain that service, but the church itself still serves as a very concrete reminder of the sacrifices made, and I hope that financial pressures over the next few decades do not in any way lead to attempts to change the nature of that church.

In the suburb of Merrylands, we have had very strong contributions by the Holroyd City Council over many, many decades to making sure the community did keep remembrance of these times past at the forefront. Amongst the sites in Merrylands is a war memorial in Arcadia Street, where the council chambers were once located. That is quite historic; it has always been there. It is the site of a ceremony each year. There is a street of trees with individual plaques adjacent to the new council chambers, and another wall was constructed in recent years. I commend not only the RSL but also the council for its leadership on these matters.

It is also worth noting that, with the demise of local halls and the increasing concentration of resources, many of the plaques that graced suburbs of the Holroyd municipality have now been collected in the council chambers themselves. So there is quite a bit of history. You can see plaques that were formerly at Westmead, Wentworthville and other suburbs. These plaques are from buildings that were utilised by groups which, with the changes in society, no longer have the numbers to stay alive.

You run across these things so often. My local party organisation in Guildford meets in the Uniting Church. The month before last there was another group utilising one of the halls, so we moved into an even older hall of that church, which had been relocated. It was so interesting to find, inside that old church hall from the First World War, indications from the Uniting Church—then the Methodist Church—of people in their parish who had died or fought in the First World War. This is the kind of thing we see. There are public memorials that have been erected not only by society in general but also by churches and other organisations to commemorate people. It is quite historic, and I have referred those various plaques to the Granville Historical Society.

Speaking of the Granville Historical Society, I am pleased that the Department of Veterans’ Affairs has funded a project of that organisation, which includes people like June Bullivant and Colin Humphreys. Former New South Wales Minister for Education Rod Cavalier, a person with no mean reputation for historical work, has commented that the Granville Historical Society is amongst the best four or five in the country—and that has been shown by their wide production of books over the years. The society has been funded more recently to do individual histories of all of the people who fought in the First World War. It has been interesting in recent months to read about those people in the Granville Guardianwhat street they lived in, what their parents did, where their parents were located at the time they enlisted et cetera. The society is really doing a monumental work in bringing those people back to life with regard to which people were related to each other, where they lived, what occupations they were undertaking when they enlisted, their age et cetera. I really congratulate that organisation for its continued work. It really will be a monumental work when accomplished.

When I was up at Rose Hill Public School for a function some years ago, I saw an interesting booklet which I have never seen anywhere else—they might have been produced in other districts of Australia during the First World War—with individual photographs of all of the people who had enlisted locally. That area, at the time of the First World War, was still semirural. I am talking about what was then referred to as the southern districts of Sydney, stretching from Guildford out to Liverpool. In this day and age, you would not believe that, back then, it still had the occasional pig farm, poultry farms and very significant stretches of wooded areas. Basically, there was very little communication between those suburbs. But there it was—a First World War booklet with photographs of all the people, from about 15 to 20 suburbs in Sydney, who had enlisted.

I have referred in passing to a significant number of memorials of very different types in my electorate. I testify to the efforts of the local RSL clubs and sub-branches, who continue to ensure each year that the important days are marked and that the monuments are maintained and renovated. One of those RSL groups that is probably facing some difficulties because of ageing is the Lidcombe RSL club. Recently I was told that they might be looking at amalgamation with another club. They are a group that, in recent years, accomplished the renaming of the local park in Lidcombe to Remembrance Park. I do not generally like repudiating history and renaming things that have historical purpose, but in this case it was probably, on balance, desirable that they replaced the former name of the park, which from recollection was named after one of the British monarchs or princes.

In summary, as I said, we have had some quibbling, whinging and complaining from the opposition about where we are today on this bill—that basically the monuments are not, in a sense, national monuments. This is a major step forward. There will be attempts by many of those opposite to accomplish the same thing for monuments in their electorates as has been engineered through this bill with regard to the memorial in Ballarat for ex-prisoners of war. I commend the legislation. I again commend the member for Ballarat, Senator Ronaldson and also the minister for bringing this legislation forward.

Mike Kelly (Eden-Monaro, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Defence Support) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very pleased to speak in support of the Military Memorials of National Significance Bill 2008, for many personal and policy reasons, which I will come to. I think it is worth while to reflect that this legislation’s immediate impact will be to enable us to designate the wonderful Australian Ex-Prisoners of War Memorial in Ballarat as a national memorial.

It is worth while to reflect briefly on what is involved with this memorial, which was designed by local sculptor Peter Blizzard. What particularly impresses me is what is behind this memorial. The Ballarat RSL, assisted by volunteers, worked for over 10 years to compile the names to form the first national database of Australian prisoners of war. That is one of the most significant and commendable things about this memorial. That involved tracking down the names of over 35,000 prisoners of war. Particularly poignant for me is that one of those names is that of my grandfather. His prisoner of war experience was based upon his time as a prisoner of the Japanese on the Burma-Thailand railway. The design of the memorial is significant in that it pays particular tribute to that experience as being one of the most intense prisoner of war experiences Australians have ever endured. The memorial is approximately 170 metres long and it features a long pathway of light grey basalt pavers cut to resemble the railway sleepers used on the Burma-Thailand railway. On the southern side are two canted black polished granite walls with the names of all known Australian prisoners of war. It is very significant that it commemorates that experience and those names.

I was a bit disappointed by the member for Mackellar’s proposed amendment in relation to this legislation. I have been fortunate to share participation in events with the member for Mackellar and I have no reason to doubt that she is very sincere and supportive of a lot of veterans issues. The issue in her amendment about politicising veterans affairs is a risk she runs with this proposed amendment. I ask her to reflect on that amendment and the possibility of perhaps withdrawing it. Before I come to that, I would also like to reflect a little bit on the personal history that I mentioned earlier. My involvement with veterans did not begin with my Army service or service in Iraq. It goes back to the experience of my grandfathers. My grandfather on my mother’s side suffered in the Second World War fighting in New Guinea and was severely injured. I remember very much his struggling through life on crutches afterwards. I will also reflect on my other grandfather, who was a prisoner of the Japanese.

Before I speak about his experiences I would like to reflect on my own experiences of working directly with veterans. I was in the Lady Davidson Hospital, which is a veterans hospital in Sydney, as a cleaner and support staff member. I was working there as a young man while going to university. It was a very poignant experience. When you clean the toilets in a rehabilitation ward and see the actual practical effects of being a disabled veteran, it has a profound impact on you. When a veteran would pass away during the course of the evening, it fell to me to help clean him up and take him to the morgue. Removing those people from amongst their friends and colleagues was a profound experience for me and it was also a very emotional experience for them. They shared their experiences and stories with me, and those important memories have been with me ever since. When I joined the Army I benefited greatly from the training of some wonderful Vietnam veterans—Rockie, Tracker, Peeps and Cowboy—who gave me the combat skills that helped me survive four deployments. The person who recruited me to the Defence Force, Brigadier Billie Rolfe, who now plays a significant role in veterans affairs, was always an inspiration to me. He lost both his legs in Vietnam but he did not let that hold him back. He has been a model to people who wish to get on with life and make something of themselves, so I salute Brigadier Billie Rolfe here today.

Last year during the election campaign I got heavily involved with a lot of veterans who saw me as an opportunity to bring veterans issues to the attention of the parliament and to deal with their issues. At one particular point I got the sense that there was a great dissatisfaction amongst the veteran community. It was starting to get quite vitriolic—as anybody who experiences the email chain in the veterans community would know. Of course, being veterans and having been through many emotional experiences, some of their correspondence can be quite vigorous. They started, unfortunately, using terms like ‘Howard’s Anzac haters’ et cetera, which I think was certainly exaggerated and over the top. It is of concern to me because we all want veterans issues to be completely bipartisan and for there not to be a wafer of paper between each side of this House in relation to veterans issues. But they certainly rallied around me, which I greatly appreciated, during an incident in the election campaign in which the chief of staff of my predecessor, Gary Nairn, assailed me as a ‘war criminal’, ‘Nazi’ and ‘murderer’ in relation to my service in Somalia and Iraq. For the Vietnam veterans, this brought back reminiscences of how they were treated on their return from Vietnam. They wrote some very powerful and emotive pieces of correspondence to me and to others, such as the RSL. I found this event extremely unfortunate, and it shows how much care we have to take in maintaining a common bipartisan position in relation to veterans affairs.

The next significant experience for me, in my immersion in the veteran community following my departure from the regular Army, was on Anzac Day this year in Bega. It was a very significant event for me as I have many family names on the memorial in Bega. It was also a great experience to march that day next to a bloke named Ron Stanton, who was a survivor of the Burma-Thai railway. If we reflect on that for a moment, it is significant in itself. This man has survived the Burma-Thai experience and, in his 80s, he is able to march on Anzac Day and show his pride. He is a very special man too, which illustrates the heart of some of these prisoners of war. He regaled me with a story about his release from imprisonment by the Japanese. He was asked to take guard of some of the Japanese who were ex-guards of his. During his experiences as a prisoner he had watched brutal treatment of his comrades and he had often said to himself that if he ever got the chance he was going to do those chaps in. So there he was, with a rifle and ammunition, in charge of unarmed Japanese whom he had to supervise digging a hole—and often during that time the Japanese would get prisoners to dig their own graves. That was a situation of great moment for this gentleman, Ron Stanton, but, instead of taking his opportunity for revenge on these guards, he actually gave them his cigarettes during a smoko. He had decided at that moment that he would move on and put things behind him. He had decided that he was not going to be like his guards and that he would make this the beginning of his healing experience from the Burma-Thai railway. It just shows what great-hearted men were those who served on the railway.

As I said, my grandfather, who was a member of the 2nd/3rd Machine Gun Battalion, served on the railway as well and he had been in the Middle East with the battalion before arriving in Batavia along with Weary Dunlop on the Orcades. They formed an impromptu battle group which was put under the command of Arthur Blackburn VC, a famous war hero from the First World War. Unfortunately, they were ill equipped. Their heavy machine gun equipment had returned to Australia and they were effectively abandoned on Batavia, but they battled on as best they could with scrappy elements of British and American troops until they were finally cornered, out of ammunition and food, and forced to surrender to the Japanese. They went straight from Batavia to the Burma-Thai railway. An interesting aspect of the service record of my grandfather—and I have a copy of it here—concerns his wife, who was left at home. If you look at the recordings in that statement of service, you see, firstly, on 28 April 1942, he was simply listed as missing, so his wife really had no idea what had happened to him at that point; and, secondly, on 2 November 1942, he was recorded as ‘Missing, believed prisoner of Japanese’. It was not until 18 September 1943 that it was confirmed that he was a prisoner of war. So through this whole period from April 1942 until September 1943 his wife would have had no idea what had happened to him. He was eventually found alive on 12 September 1945 and recovered from the Japanese in what was then called Siam, and he was evacuated to Australia in October. He was sent to Heidelberg hospital to recover and was eventually able to resume life with his family in April 1946.

The experience of the families and those veterans did not end there, of course. Many years of suffering lay ahead in coming to grips with that experience. It was a really tragic situation for us to bury Thelma Waters, a constituent of mine, a few weeks ago. She was one of those widows who suffered through 20 years of having to live with the outcome and the psychological problems of a prisoner of war veteran. For these veterans, and for me, this memorial is incredibly significant. It is a place of reflection, a place for us to pay tribute to that suffering and experience. It does not really matter to me, as someone who is the grandson of a person listed on that memorial, that it is in Ballarat; I am just comforted by the fact that it is there. National memorials should not just be confined to Canberra. In fact, a couple of weeks ago I was fortunate enough to open the National Timber Workers Memorial in Eden, which commemorates a number of timber workers who lost their lives in the industry, and $50,000 of Commonwealth money went towards that memorial. I am happy to say that my predecessor, Gary Nairn, who helped obtain that money from the Commonwealth, also attended that ceremony.

It is entirely appropriate that we have national memorials outside Canberra, and I pay tribute to the previous government for their contribution to the creation of this wonderful ex-prisoners of war memorial. Far from politicising veterans affairs, the Rudd Labor government has been actively delivering on all of the measures that have made and are making the lives of veterans greatly relieved and improved. I note that the member for Mackellar did acknowledge that. We have now moved on to resolve a lot of the legacy issues for those veterans who want peace of mind. It was a great pleasure of mine to assist the members of the second D&E Platoon in finally resolving acknowledgement of their service and what they endured in Vietnam. We are also proceeding to assist Korean armistice veterans and the Long Tan veterans. This is about peace of mind; it is about healing, sharing, alleviating pain and grief and remembering so that the stories of these prisoners of war—these veterans—are honoured and that future generations know the price of freedom. The veterans know they have a friend in this government. We have a lot to deliver on and a lot of expectations to meet, but I believe they will also find that they have the best Minister for Veterans’ Affairs this country has ever seen. They are certainly already reflecting to me their appreciation of his directness, his truthfulness and his efforts on their behalf. In that respect, I would invite the member for Mackellar to withdraw her amendment which, I must warn her, is not being well received among the ex-prisoners of war. I encourage all in this House to refocus on what should be unqualified bipartisan support for this legislation.

Alan Griffin (Bruce, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Veterans' Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a great pleasure to be here and I would really like to thank the Parliamentary Secretary for Defence Support for finishing early! I thank him, and I want to assure him that my tailor will thank him when I get the sauce out of this suit at a later stage. I am commencing my summing up of the Military Memorials of National Significance Bill 2008. This bill provides an opportunity to realise the wish—and deservedly the wish—of the community of Ballarat with respect to the Ballarat POW memorial and its capacity to be recognised formally and officially as a national memorial and, in this case, using the term a ‘military memorial of national significance’. The amendment moved by the member for Mackellar and a number of opposition speakers have addressed aspects of this issue in suggesting—and in fact claiming—that the government has breached an election promise. Nothing could be further from the truth. I assure members that when I do get the opportunity to finalise the consideration of this bill—possibly later today but probably more likely early next week—I will make it clear in detail as to why that is the case. This memorial is a very significant and special memorial, and that is something which speakers on all sides have addressed. As we approach question time, I acknowledge the member for Ballarat and her very detailed and long-term commitment to ensuring that this memorial is properly recognised as a national memorial. There is no doubt that Catherine King, the member for Ballarat, has made this an important objective for the local community. It has been on the basis of that local community and the prisoner of war community nationwide that this matter was brought to our attention, and I am more than pleased to be in the situation where we can take action on her behalf.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! It being 2 pm, the debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 97. The debate may be resumed at a later hour and the minister will have leave to continue speaking when the debate is resumed.