Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 3 Hansard (8 April) . . Page.. 712 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

could emphasise peace between two countries who have been at war". That a peace park does exist already quite close to that location and near the National Library is, of course, the case. But a Canberra/Nara Peace Park is something special; it is an indication of one city in one country having a very positive relationship with another city in another country. I believe it is an entirely appropriate way for us to proceed. I am very pleased that we have the opportunity to be involved in a peace park. I hope that it will continue as quickly as possible, and I hope that the Prime Minister, who has chosen not to live here, will not interfere with the relationship between our city and another city.

MS HORODNY (4.24): Mr Temporary Deputy Speaker, my contribution to this debate will be very short; but, following on from what Mr Moore said, I do want to say that in this whole discussion that we have had much has been made of Japan's reluctance to apologise for wartime atrocities. In fact, Mrs Carnell has said that the mayor of Nara has made a public statement apologising for Japan's behaviour in the war. Like Mr Moore, I wonder why there has been so much concentration on the need for Japan to apologise for wartime atrocities. I wonder why there has not been a similar call for Germany to apologise for the atrocities committed by that country; for America and Australia to apologise to Vietnam; and for Australia to apologise to our Aboriginal people for the genocide and the atrocities which we have committed here in this country, on this land, and which, unfortunately, we continue to commit in a much more subtle way.

I also wonder why America has never apologised to Japan for dropping the bombs on Japan. It has always been a very sad irony to me that, while the rest of the world was celebrating the end of World War II, Japan was coming to terms with and dealing with the horrible things which happened there and which initiated the end of World War II, and the aftermath of those horrific events. None of these apologies has ever been made. I think it would be appropriate and wonderful for all these apologies to actually be made in recognition of the fact that most dreadful things have occurred between nations on this planet and there has been a lot of hurt and a lot of decimation by one people of another.

Given that these apologies generally will never occur, I want to see us move forward on this issue. I believe we can learn, and we need to learn, from places like Northern Ireland and the Middle East, where there has not been movement; there has not been peace; there has not been a moving forward from people hanging onto the past, in fact, for centuries and for millennia. In fact, in the Middle East Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat had an agreement on land for peace. It was an important concept, but it has now been lost and we are back to full-scale war in that part of the world. The lesson from all that is very clear, and that is: To move forward, we have to let go of the past.

I do not believe anyone has a problem with a peace park. In this whole issue there has been a huge process problem, and that has been recognised. There has been also a crossover of issues, and that is very unfortunate because it means that the real meaning of peace has been overlooked. I would just like to remind people of the real meaning of peace. Peace is about agreement; it is about compromise; it is about harmony and neutrality; it is about non-belligerence, non-aggression and peaceful coexistence.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .