In the Senate Question Time yesterday, 18th September, Senator Fraser Anning (Katter’ s Australian Party) asked Sen. Marise Payne three questions on RCB Service recognition as warlike during the Malaysian Counter Insurgency War.
We thank Senator Anning for his support. He has read the evidence and is championing our claim for an independent inquiry
You can watch the event here:
A challenge to the accuracy of Senator Payne’s answers is being prepared by the RCB Review Group. Until we present that challenge we ask our supporters to keep calm.
I note that she continues to ignore the evidence that shows the true facts of security and repeats the same claptrap that has been repeated for some years. And of course the Mohr Review (2000) that she refers to did not comment on service at Butterworth post 1971, the DHAAT has no jurisdiction in the matter, and the NZ report is irrelevant as the Kiwis in general served under completely different conditions.
More obfuscation, more misleading of Parliament.
They just don’t get it!!! The politicians (and the public servants who draft the answers) are only able to repeatedly quote unfair outdated legislation. When will they look at amending the legislation and/or correct their unfair interpretation of what it was actually like in Butterworth 1968 to 89!!!
The truth has once again been obstructed. Firstly Senator Payne acknowledges the award of the ASM which in itself can only be awarded for Operational – non warlike service. The ASM for both the 45 – 75 and 75 – 89 periods were approved at the time by the Governor General and endorsed by the relevant Defence Ministers on behalf of Defence . She failed to state that this service has since not been approved by the various Ministers for Veterans Affairs under the Veterans Entitlements Act ( VEA ) for the purposes of repatriation benefits. The VEA defines Operational service as both Non Warlike and Warlike service. It is not incumbent of Dept of Veterans Affairs to define Nature Of Service however once a particular service is approved by the Governor General as operational service then its a matter of Veterans Affairs approving same under the VEA. At present the service is classified as Peacetime service or normal Defence Service under the VEA and this is where the obstruction rests.
Isn’t it funny but even on the air base completely surrounded by Fences the ready reaction section had live magazines in there webbing and and a full combat load in a box on the truck 24/7.
I remember having a lecture prior to deployment from Singapore (Kangaw Barracks) to Butterworth (1973 D Coy 6 RAR) where we were informed that we would be disciplined under the Army Act and not the Defence Act at Butterworth. I never realised the difference at the time.