Steve Hutchins (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

It gives me great pleasure to follow the Chair of the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee inquiry into reforms to Australia’s military justice system, Senator Johnston, because, during the progress of not only this inquiry but our original inquiry into military justice, the likes of Senator Johnston, Senator Payne, Senator Sandy Macdonald and my colleagues Senator Hogg and Senator Bishop were of invaluable assistance in some of the difficult areas and aspects of the military that we had to deal with. Senator Johnston outlined that this is the first progress report of the surveillance or oversight of the implementation of those aspects of the military justice report that the government agreed to implement. It was with pleasure that the government agreed to our recommendation to have surveillance or oversight ability into that implementation. You may recall that the inquiry implemented by the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee was the sixth inquiry into military justice in 10 years. Clearly, from the evidence that we were given during the conduct of that inquiry, there had been very little procedural or cultural change within the military in Australia. That is why it was with pleasure that the government accepted the ability of the legislation committee chaired by Senator Johnston to operate in that surveillance role.

My colleague Senator Bishop, who may be making a contribution later in this debate, has highlighted on the last few occasions he has spoken that he is not overly convinced that there is this change in the military. Indeed, our initial report concentrated on procedural change. We are clearly not in a position to implement cultural change within the Australian military; that is something that can only come from the top down. Looking at a number of outstanding cases from that 10-year period does not lead us to the conclusion that that cultural change in the military has taken place. There is the case of Air Vice Marshal Criss and what look like the terrible things that were done to him. He was a senior officer and a man who was held in high esteem by his Air Force men, so much so that when he left the air base—I live near RAAF Base Glenbrook—all the air men and air women, if they are the terms for RAAF personnel, lined the streets around the exit to the air base to farewell him. That is the esteem in which he was held.

We are still receiving inquiries from the families of deceased personnel who are still in conference with the Commonwealth about compensation. We are still receiving inquiries from families about aspects of their children’s service lives and what they see as being the denial of military justice. I am glad that Senator Johnston mentioned the fine work of the secretariat of this committee, headed by Dr Kathleen Dermody. To a large degree, we senators have been protected from some of the terrible, I suppose, documentation that has been presented to Dr Dermody and her staff over the two inquiries. They are the ones who are receiving the phone calls from distressed parents because their children are still in difficult situations or have died either naturally or by suicide. Sometimes, during the conduct of the previous Senate inquiry, they received these inquiries almost daily from parents, men and women who have a grievance against the Australian military. Senator Bishop highlighted the other day the case of Lieutenant Commander Robyn Fahy and the difficulties that have been experienced by the family of Air Force cadet Eleanor Tibble.

So we are not necessarily convinced that this cultural change is under way within the military. Why would you be at all convinced that it is occurring if the newspaper reports are correct about the conduct of the Kovco inquiry? It seems that even now, after all the publicity, the fanfare and the determination by government and senior staff of the military to make sure that there is procedural and cultural change for justice in the military, what is being exposed in the Kovco inquest does not lead you to any conclusion other than that this is some sort of paper shuffle by the military.

Senator Hogg was going to speak in this debate, and I might echo some of Senator Hogg’s views. Senator Hogg is quite sceptical of the military and how they treat the parliament and Senate inquiries. At best, Senator Hogg—and Senator Hogg can come in here later and say whether I am right or wrong—believes that the military are dismissive of us and, at worst, that they have utter contempt for us. I wait to see the outcome of the Kovco case and whether we will be proven correct in some of our observations of the lack of cultural change.

Currently before the CDF is a report from Andrew Podger into the ethos and training of ADF establishments. We did request of the minister that we receive a briefing on this report but, as it is still with the commander, we were advised that it is not available at this stage. I hope there is nothing damning in that report of military establishments such as Singleton or other training establishments, but, to use what I think is a Sydney expression, I would put London to a brick on it that there is a difficulty that will be explained in that report about what is still going on in these defence establishments.

In conclusion, I suppose it is ironic that at the moment we have a number of young men and women in uniform in all parts of the world defending basic human rights. The irony is that it still appears that those basic human rights that we ask them to defend elsewhere are denied them in our own establishments.