Page 1395 - Week 04 - Thursday, 4 April 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
equivalents who have served in modern-day conflicts over the past 40 years will remain untold.
MS LE COUTEUR (Murrumbidgee) (4.00): I obviously support my colleague’s motion concerning national institutions. I was going to talk particularly about national institutions seeking and possibly receiving other support because of funding shortfalls and I will comment on that a bit more given Mr Hanson’s comments about not needing to rob Peter to pay Paul. The Greens are talking about adequate funding for all our national institutions. They all have an importance.
I admit that my favourite national institution is probably the National Library and I am very concerned that it has over many years been underfunded. A little bit more money has recently been given to Trove, which I think is a very good thing. Institutions like the War Memorial and the National Library provide our shared history. They are a truth-telling place for all Australians and it is important that as a nation we adequately fund them.
Looking specifically at the War Memorial, one of the disturbing things is the fact that arms manufacturers are funding the War Memorial basically in exchange for advertising at the War Memorial. Personally this is repugnant; totally not in the spirit of the impassioned speech Mr Hanson made; they are seeing war quite differently from him. Many people, possibly even Mr Hanson, find arms manufacturers advertising in the War Memorial to be repugnant.
Members may also be aware that the Australian Medical Association for Prevention of War has been campaigning on this issue for some time. They count amongst their members a recent recipient of the Noble Peace Prize, Associate Professor Tilman Ruff. To quote from their “Commemorate, don’t commercialise” campaign, it is simply unacceptable that every visitor to the war memorial is greeted by an illuminated sign featuring the corporate logos of these companies. The BAE Systems Theatre is actively promoted for hire, thus marketing Britain’s biggest weapons maker.
It being 45 minutes after the commencement of crossbench executive members’ business, the debate was interrupted in accordance with standing order 77. Ordered that the time allotted to crossbench executive members’ business be extended by 30 minutes.
MS LE COUTEUR: BAE Systems is a major military supplier to Saudi Arabia, a country known to sponsor terrorism and currently committing atrocities against civilians in Yemen. BAE has been the subject of multiple corruption investigations, including for its dealings with Saudi Arabia.
The War Memorial has a three-year partnership deal with Lockheed Martin, the world’s largest weapons manufacturer which also has a history of corruption. This deal includes assistance with commemorating the centenary of Armistice Day. During World War I the weapons industry very sadly made huge profits as Australians and others were slaughtered in unprecedented numbers.
The campaign also notes the many other multinational weapons companies that are sponsors and donors, including Boeing, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, and Thales.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video