Guy Barnett (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise tonight initially to respond to the allegations made by Senator Kerry O’Brien in this chamber just a few moments ago during the adjournment debate, in an effort to besmirch the good reputation and credibility of the federal member for Bass, Michael Ferguson. Senator O’Brien’s effort is part of a longstanding campaign of muckraking and destabilising the future prospects for Michael Ferguson as the federal Liberal member for Bass. Senator O’Brien referred to Michael Ferguson as a person who worked on my staff. In that respect, he is correct. I know Michael Ferguson as an open, honest and honourable man. Michael Ferguson has been judged on his performance and as a former teacher, a husband, a father, a family man and a man with strong values that are recognised throughout the community. He was judged on his performance at the last federal election, where he was successful in defeating the then Labor member for Bass, Michelle O’Byrne. He will be judged likewise at the next federal election, notwithstanding the efforts by Senator O’Brien to besmirch his good reputation. Senator O’Brien has taken the view that if you throw mud then some of it will stick. For that I am most disappointed in Senator O’Brien’s efforts tonight.

Senator O’Brien said that he had called on Michael Ferguson to respond to the allegations made by him, but Mr Ferguson has not received any advice from Senator O’Brien to that effect. Senator O’Brien has done this in the chamber without notification to the other party, and I know that he has not advised Mr Ferguson of these allegations. He simply made them under parliamentary privilege, and I consider such efforts to be bordering on the scurrilous. I know that these allegations will be seen for what they are: an effort to undermine and besmirch Mr Ferguson’s good reputation as the federal member for Bass. That will be borne out in due course.

I would like to speak in support of the holding of an inquiry into the merit of replacing the Queen’s birthday holiday and the granting of honours that currently occur on that day. I believe it is time to replace the June Queen’s birthday holiday with an alternative day with more relevance to Australia’s heritage and more significance for the Australian people, especially our young people. This long weekend holiday has little relevance to the Queen’s birthday, let alone significant relevance to any Australian historical context. I also support the withdrawal of the Queen’s birthday honours tradition on this day and replacing it with a new system whereby we could announce civilian awards and the like on Australia Day in January and bravery and military awards on Anzac Day or, at least, in the week of Anzac Day.

I know my monarchist friends have dismissed this as more tom-tom noises from the republican drum. Yes, I am a republican, but in no way am I banging the republican drum. My aim is to strengthen our great institutions and traditions, such as Australia Day and Anzac Day, rather than fritter away the tradition on a day that has little relevance for Her Majesty, let alone Australians. I am sure we would all want to ensure that Australian honours were being bestowed on deserving Australians—those unsung heroes among our volunteers and others from everyday life in the outer suburbs and rural and regional areas, not just those in metropolitan elite positions of power and influence. Hence, an inquiry into all aspects of our honours system, including the decision-making process, would have great merit.

I believe everyone felt the Anzac spirit in the great mining rescue at Beaconsfield in May following the mine collapse on 25 April. The rescue brought the spirit of Anzac alive in the minds of many Australians, highlighting the characteristics of bravery and mateship. It provided an answer to questions about the mystique of Anzac Day. That is why I believe there is scope for celebrating at least some bravery and military awards on Anzac Day or in Anzac week. Anzac Day is now so instrumental in moulding and shaping our culture and national psyche that the celebration of valour and bravery in 21st century Australia sits quite appropriately in that week.

The Queen’s birthday holiday, which we have just celebrated, is simply at the wrong time and has little meaning for Australians. This is not a protest against Her Majesty the Queen, who I believe has been a fantastic beacon and force of stability for the Commonwealth of nations and indeed the world. I had the honour of hearing her address in the Australian parliament on her recent visit, and I believe it was one of the best I have heard—a class act. It was noted during her visit that during her reign more than 10 prime ministers from both Australia and the UK have come and gone. Her Majesty’s perspective on history is supreme.

Queen Elizabeth II was actually born on 21 April 1926, which means that for almost 70 years we have celebrated her birthday on the wrong day and in the wrong month. Most people in the United Kingdom do not celebrate the Queen’s birthday with a public holiday, but we in Australia do. Why is this so? I question this attachment between Australians and the Queen’s birthday. In 1936, most states decided to proclaim a holiday in June, close to the birthday of King George V, and we have been stuck with this embarrassing anomaly of having a birthday holiday for the wrong monarch, in the wrong month and on the wrong day ever since. I have the deepest respect for Her Majesty, but my hope is to Australianise our institutions and honours system and help make them relevant in 21st century Australia.

I am also not trying to rob Australians of a public holiday. We could replace this public holiday with a holiday to celebrate the mammoth effort of the nation’s volunteers. Our volunteer numbers have doubled, from 3.2 million in 1995 to 6.3 million a decade later, yet they are underrecognised. They contribute 836 million hours each year to Australia, conservatively valued at $30 billion or $82 million a day. We could replace the June long weekend holiday with a holiday to honour our volunteers in National Volunteers Week in May, in September on National Wattle Day or on some other suitable day. Alternatively, a day could be set aside to honour those who lived in Australia prior to white settlement, Indigenous Australians. Public discussions about these ideas may give rise to other days worthy of replacing the June long weekend holiday. I would welcome feedback and hope for further debate.

My other related suggestion is moving the awarding of the Queen’s birthday honours to Australia Day or Anzac Day, so that public service and civil awards are announced on Australia Day, 26 January, with military and bravery awards announced on Anzac Day or in Anzac week. I suggest this because we have been missing superb and historic opportunities to enhance Anzac Day and Australia Day as the profound statements of Australian nationalism that they deserve to be. The solution is not overly challenging, but it does require an act of will. Why not combine the Queen’s birthday and Australia Day honours and ensure bravery awards and medals of a military nature are announced on Anzac Day? Both moves would enhance the significance of the two days.

In the case of Anzac Day, we could broaden its nature and construction to formally honour and commemorate those deserving a bravery award, the brave and meritorious service of our Defence Force personnel and veterans with the appropriate accolades. My own grandfather was a World War I veteran and, like so many other Australians, I am immensely proud. The growing number of Australians, particularly young Australians, in Anzac Day services here, at Gallipoli and elsewhere is heartening. We can build on that. This week I have read that former Australian prime ministers Malcolm Fraser and Gough Whitlam support changes to the way the Queen’s birthday awards are administered, along with a change to the date of their announcement. That is why I support an inquiry into this issue.

An inquiry could have the terms of reference to investigate the current arrangements and identify the impediments and advantages of changing both the holiday and the arrangements for the granting of the awards. The public holiday is ultimately a matter for the state governments. Last year I wrote to each Premier seeking their views on my recommendations. Their response—without detailing private correspondence—was a reluctant agreement to the status quo but also an openness to consider the merits of change, particularly where there is community support.

What does the community think? Let us have a debate and learn. I am currently aware of some angst about the appropriateness of some of the awards and the fact that those in rural and regional Australia seem to be missing out. In addition, I would suggest the level of understanding of the honours system and the different honours awarded is very low indeed. A new education and information effort and public awareness campaign, at minimum, are required to ensure these important Australian initiatives are relevant and meaningful now and into the future.

As a final note, I ask the question: would we as a nation continue these traditions under a new monarch? I suggest the relevance and meaning in the awards and public holiday would be minimal and certainly considerably less than they are today, which is already very low. The 1995 report of the review of Australian honours and awards supported these recommendations. My desire is to enhance our comparatively young but clearly strong and unique Australian character, our traditions and our history. Australia’s history encompasses our European heritage, our Australian Indigenous culture and the brilliant tapestry and mix of migrants who have called Australia home. (Time expired)