Further to our last Update I can report that the Tribunal is nearing the Hearing date.
You can see The Tribunal’s terms of reference here and submissions to date here.
Of specific interest is the Defence Submission dated 6 July Submission 096 – Chief of the Defence Force on behalf of Defence but not presented publicly until 31 July and our Response dated 23 August 2022 Submission 065a – Mr Raymond Fulcher on behalf of the Rifle Company Butterworth Review Group
On the 19th August the Tribunal requested both Defence and RCBRG and one other principal body to answer specific questions on the RCB’s deployment and operations.
We see this request as a positive move by the Tribunal to understand the core issues and facts. Our answers are being finalised.
The Tribunal’s request also invited any other questions that should be asked. We’ve replied with two questions that we have put previously to Defence many times, but they have deigned not to respond:
1. In relation to the incurred danger test as it applied to RCB, and given the established rulings by the Federal Court and other Tribunals, what level of danger does Defence say was required to meet the threshold of the incurred danger test?
2. Which section/s of what legislation or regulation authorises the award of the ASM for normal peacetime service?
On behalf of the RCBRG, I thank you all for your DHAAT submissions and your untiring assistance, patience and perseverance over many years dating back to 1986 with Robert Cross initiating the claim and joined by other dedicated men in Stan Hannaford, Phil Marsh, Phil Oysten, Ken Rundell, and Chris Duffield to name a few. Their torch has been kept alight by other veterans who joined the action with massive contributions. You are all exemplars of the RAR’s motto Duty First.
RCB Service 1979
Chairman RCB Review Group
Date: 14 September 2022
Short version ? Change or no change ?