Andrew Laming (Bowman, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Trent Zimmerman (North Sydney, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Gavin Pearce (Braddon, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion and reserve my right to speak later.

Shayne Neumann (Blair, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Veterans' Affairs and Defence Personnel) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm pleased to support this motion and the sentiment behind it. Recently, the Defence Honours and Awards Appeals Tribunal recommended the creation of a new class of medals and clasps which recognises the loss suffered by families of Australian Defence Force personnel killed or seriously wounded as a result of their service. This followed a referral of the matter to the tribunal in January last year by the former Minister for Veterans' Affairs and Minister for Defence Personnel.

In its report on the inquiry, the tribunal noted that Australia, through the Order of Australia and the Australian defence honours and awards system, already recognises the services of ADF members. In addition, Australia recognises the wounding, injury or death of such members in a variety of essential ways—for example, through health care, income support, compensation, family support services, bereavement pins and memorials. However, the inquiry considered that none of these consequences of service are reflected in the present medallic forms of recognition, none expressly convey the gratitude of the nation for individual sacrifice and none provide a suitably solemn and individual emblem of that gratitude. The tribunal therefore recommended that it is timely, if not incumbent, for Australia to initiate such an expression of its gratitude to members and their families. This would provide a tangible and readily recognisable expression of national gratitude for the sacrifice of ADF members killed or suffering a serious wound, injury or disease in or as a result of their service, and that of their families, and would do so in a way that allows existing defence honours and awards to better tell the story of that service.

Importantly, this motion recognises the strong advocacy of former Special Air Service Regiment Warrant Officer Kerry Danes and his wife, Dr Kay Danes, including through a petition that attracted around 45,000 signatures. Mr Danes launched his campaign several years ago, following the tragic Black Hawk helicopter collision during an army exercise in Townsville in 1996 which resulted, tragically, in the deaths of 18 soldiers. He has made the point that telling a story is important to our nation. Our existing defence honours and awards systems tell the story of where our personnel served and for how long but, for those killed in service both overseas and at home in response to emergencies, conflict and disasters, we do not officially personalise their sacrifice and conclude their record of service. Mr Danes therefore proposed a clasp on these individuals' campaign or service medals which would complete the story of personal service and sacrifice. After all, there are precedents overseas, as the member for Bowman said, and we should recognise them.

Australian soldiers have argued that there should be something similar to the Purple Heart for ADF personnel killed or wounded in action. But it should also recognise the families for their service and sacrifice, and I want to acknowledge also the advocacy of my colleague the member for Solomon on this issue and thank him very much, because, alongside the member for Bowman, he has been a strong advocate for special forces and Afghanistan veterans, as well as for veterans' mental health and for victims of abuse in the ADF. Thank you, Luke, for the work you've done.

Of course, those advocates and Labor urge the government to stand up on behalf of and for former ADF personnel and their families. The government has not always done this, firstly, in the response to the Brereton war crimes report, which had a terrible effect on the mental health of our current and former personnel. Secondly, tragically, the Morrison government had to be dragged kicking and screaming to a royal commission into defence and veterans' suicide. We know that many defence personnel have been medically discharged, have suffered mental health issues and in some cases have, tragically, taken their lives. I would encourage everyone to cooperate with the royal commission. I know that the Sydney hearings are happening today. I would encourage veterans and their families to engage with the royal commission. Some sort of recognition of the impact of service and the sufferings would play a therapeutic role for veterans and their families. This is a decision which I'd ask the government to take up on the recommendation of the tribunal.

I want to take this opportunity to thank the many veterans and their families for their sacrifice, and for the submissions that they've also made. I note that the awards tribunal saw hundreds of submissions and individuals. There are 220 individuals and groups who have made submissions to that inquiry. I urge the government to not procrastinate, to engage consultatively, to accept the advice of the umpire and to do the right thing by these veterans and their families.

Gavin Pearce (Braddon, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Inscribed in the wall of the War Memorial are the words: 'No greater love has any man than to lay down his life for a friend.' They're very solemn words and they strike to the heart of every veteran and every person who has ever served—and every person who has lost anyone as a result of that service. I want today to acknowledge all the young Australians who worked up the courage to finally go into a recruiting office and raise their hand and swear by oath or affirmation that they'll put their life on the line for the defence of their country. They raise their right hand and they swear an oath to Australia, its people, its government, its Queen, her heirs and excesses according to law, so help me God. Once that solemn pledge has been made, then that young Australian's life changes, and it changes in a very profound way. Veterans and those who are serving will understand exactly what I mean. I don't have the words to articulate the degree of soul-searching that happens prior to making that decision to make that pledge. We then take them to their recruitment training establishments at Kapooka or Cerberus or Edinburgh at the Australian Defence Force Academy or the Royal Military College, and there we teach them, we ingrain in them, we inculcate in them very deeply, very solemnly that their importance as an individual is secondary to that of the team and that the person on their right and the person on their left are the people they should make the ultimate sacrifice for. They would, in an instant, give their life for that person on the right or the left.

Many ask why, and the answer is simple: it's because that person on your right or your left would give their life for you. This is further inculcated, further strengthened, further reinforced as we take them through initial employment training, and then they finally march into their unit. Upon marching into a battalion, they see the battle honours that unit has received, and they feel and they smell and they taste the legends of generations that have gone before them. They understand the importance of the person on their right and on their left. Then, we, as a nation, put them in harm's way. We send them to the most dangerous places on the planet, and there they're required to engage the enemy by whatever means that might look like. But, ultimately, they're willing to put their life on the line for their mates, for their unit, for their country and for their mission.

Then the funerals come as a result of that. I've spoken in this place before what it means, and those that have attended a military funeral will understand the significance and the solemn feel that that portrays to everybody that's involved. At the conclusion of one particular funeral, which I'll never forget until the day I die, I was required to pass the Australian national flag to a next of kin, as is the tradition. I'll never forget the look in that mother's eyes as she took that flag, and in this place of words I'm lost for the words that describe what I've felt that day. I wanted to bring that young bloke back. I wanted to hug her. I wanted to have the words that would ease her pain. And I didn't. I felt guilty that I, as part of the leadership team, had taken her son away. I still feel guilty. I still feel inadequate. I still feel as if there were words that I should have said that I couldn't, and I'm sure that there are many people in my position that want to say those words and can't.

Let this remind people of those words that can't be said. Let this remind people of the tears that we shed in private. Let this remind people of the ultimate sacrifice that is paid in defending our nation and its people. If we can do nothing else for those that make that ultimate sacrifice, we can do this: we can remember them. We must never forget them. Lest we forget.

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

I thank the member for Bowman for bringing this forward. He approached me some time ago—years ago—about this issue. It must be said it was in a typically weird way, but, nevertheless, I thought it was something very worthwhile supporting. I got behind it and have been advocating for it since. I thank the member for Blair for his acknowledgement of that.

Before I get into the substance of this motion, I want to make a quick comment about the service at the War Memorial and the Last Post ceremony we have at the start of each parliamentary year. I was frankly disgusted at the level of turnout from politicians, federal members, in this place. There would have been 15, 16 or 17 federal representatives—MPs and senators. There should be four ranks of members of parliament and senators, people who represent Australians, at that one service that kicks off the parliamentary year. It's one hour of your time to acknowledge all those that have laid down their lives for our country before you get on with the rest of the year and the politics and the carry-on. We do important work here, yes, but you only have to give up one hour for that Last Post ceremony to say, 'For this calendar year and our efforts in the parliament, we will remember those that gave their lives for our freedom.'

What it will also do, members in place, when you attend that Last Post ceremony and look up at the tens of thousands of names of those that have gone before us, is remind you to not be so flippant about war. It will remind you that war is a serious business and is paid for in the blood of patriotic men and women of this country. When you launch a pre-election campaign with megaphone diplomacy, talking tough, just remember that this country will always stand up for its values and its principles. We won't take a backwards step. But needless and careless actions and flippant references to war should be thought about deeply. That Last Post ceremony gives all honourable member the opportunity to reflect.

I also want to acknowledge the work of Kerry and Kay Danes in bringing the work that led to the inquiry forward. I served with Kerry for a short time in Timor-Leste. He's a great man who has done a lot, as is his wife, Kay. I worked closely with her to try and get the interpreters of Australian veterans and some of the embassy security guards out in that shambolic withdrawal from Afghanistan. They are good people, as is Andrew Sloan, who does a mountain of work to assist veterans every day. He did a lot of work on this campaign that led to the inquiry that has now given us recommendations. I want to acknowledge and thank Ray and Pam Palmer, who lost their son, Scotty. He was Territory born and bred. He was lost in Afghanistan with the commandos. Ray and Pam have been a big supporter of this push to get some sort of medallic recognition for those who have been either killed in service or injured or wounded in service. It's an important recognition, medallic recognition. As Ray often says, his son's name is up on the War Memorial wall, but it would be nice to have his son's medals that accurately reflect the totality of his service and his sacrifice.

So I encourage the widest possible consultation about the recommendations. The ball's now in the government's court to do that work, and I wish them well in arriving at a good conclusion. As the member for Blair added, the royal commission is in Sydney and holding hearings, and my thoughts, prayers and solidarity are with all involved in that program.

Lucy Wicks (Robertson, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made in the order of the day for a later hour.