Page 1385 - Week 04 - Thursday, 4 April 2019

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


As members undoubtedly know, the federal government has already decided to allocate close to $500 million to the Australian War Memorial: $500 million earmarked for a new building to go on top of and around an existing building that was not so long ago upgraded. This extraordinary amount of money has been provided to one place without any comparative assessment of need. If it were to be spent more judiciously, it could restore most of the past 10 years of cuts and have change left over. The massive and expensive plan to expand the Australian War Memorial cannot be justified.

The Greens, as a party with non-violence as a core pillar, respect and support the War Memorial’s mission to remember, interpret, and understand Australia’s history in war. Our opposition to the expansion is not in any way about reducing the role of the memorial or minimising the history of those who have served in our nation’s defence forces. Nor would our position preclude required expansion to further reflect the trials and triumphs of our current servicemen and servicewomen, the Invictus generation, as Dr Brendan Nelson has spoken of them, or to revisit older chapters as required. It is instead about ensuring that cornerstones of our national cultural life, the custodians of our stories and a vital part of Canberra’s geography are kept intact despite the slings and arrows of political expediency.

It is also evident that there is an increasing amount of community opposition to this inappropriate and unnecessary expansion of the War Memorial. I was particularly struck by the opposition of a group of prominent Australians who co-signed a letter saying the project is unjustified. Those who signed the letter include former Australian War Memorial director Brendon Kelson, former deputy director Michael McKernan and five of its ex-staff. Novelists Tom Keneally and Richard Flanagan; author and speechwriter Don Watson; Australia's first female premier, Carmen Lawrence; historians; and a group of ex-senior public servants and diplomats also signed the letter, as well as former Australian Human Rights Commission president Gillian Triggs. There are many other notable Australians in the list of signatories making the argument that the money could be better spent.

I agree with them. Noting that $350 million has also just been spent on the Sir John Monash Centre in Villers-Bretonneux in northern of France to mark the centenary of the end of World War I, we need to see a more balanced and equitable expenditure for our national institutions. Perhaps, as many in the community have observed, if there is $500 million available it might be better spent on helping those who have served our country recover from their experiences and resume their lives in our community.

As I have outlined, the Greens support the role and importance of the War Memorial. It should be properly funded to perform the important role it plays in our community. It certainly should not have to go cap in hand to arms manufacturers seeking sponsorship to help meet its budget. As members may have read, in recent times, visitors to the War Memorial have found sponsorship signs for various exhibitions. These sponsorship deals are being made with arms manufacturers. The Australian War Memorial is sacred ground in the collective psyche of this country. It is utterly inappropriate for weapon and bomb makers like Boeing, Raytheon and Lockheed Martin to sponsor exhibits commemorating the tragedy of war and the experience of


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