A campaign to overturn the controversial sale of dozens of defence properties is “getting some movement” with the Albanese Government according to the RSL which is also urging all sides to keep emotion out of the vocal debate.
Appearing at the National Press Club on Monday, RSL National President Peter Tinley said the government was listening to his organisation’s concerns about the push to sell off either wholly or in part 67 military sites around Australia.
Defence Minister Richard Marles earlier this year outlined the proposed fire sale of assets such as Victoria Barracks in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane, as well as Perth’s Irwin and Leeuwin barracks, which Labor believes could generate $3 billion.
Asked by The Nightly how discussions with the government were progressing, Mr Tinley responded that it was important to first understand Labor’s motivations for selling some sites that were considered important to veterans.
“One thing we know about big A advocacy is how you conduct yourself in any issue really matters because it’s not how you go in this field; it’s how you set yourself up for the next one. So, how we conduct ourselves is really important.”
“We are in some disagreement with the government, but also the government’s been listening. They understand in places such as Tasmania, what would be left if they went ahead with the list as published. We’re getting some movement,” he added.
Last week former governor-general Peter Cosgrove urged the Albanese government to scrap its planned sale of Sydney’s Victoria Barracks, joining other high-profile critics of the proposed selloff including former prime ministers John Howard and Paul Keating.
“There is always this temptation to say, ‘Those historic-looking places kept beautiful for all Australians are sort of surplus to requirements for the rough-tough army, navy or air force,’ and that’s a fairly shallow view,” the former Defence Chief told Radio 2GB.
“Victoria Barracks … is part of the national fabric. We’d no sooner go out to a cave in deepest Arnhem Land and get busy with a chisel than do the same thing at Victoria Barracks.”
Asked to elaborate on whether the RSL was hopeful that a certain number of Defence properties would be removed from sale, Mr Tinley said that his organisation was not focused on individual sites.
“It was not about a number; it’s about an outcome . . . How do we want the future defence force to be shaped,” the former WA State Labor Minister told his press club audience, which included Mr Marles and Veterans’ Affairs Minister Matt Keogh.
“I know there’s a lot of emotion in this, but we’ve got to really keep in my view, a very clear-eyed view on the objective that we’re trying to achieve.”
During his press club address the former SAS soldier also discussed Australia’s “missing line of defence”, which he described as someone empowered to ensure the nation is ready to deal with serious disruption.
“If Australia is seriously disrupted tomorrow, in a way that reaches our communications, financial system and our public confidence at the same time, there is no single person in the Commonwealth whose job it is to make sure we are ready,” he said.
“Not because anyone has failed. Because the duty of coordination does not exist. This is the missing line of defence. It is a duty nobody holds.”
Mr Tinley outlined the three measures in the RSL’s national preparedness framework: an act that makes preparing the nation a continuing legal duty, an independent commission to determine which resilience measures are worth the money, and a government adviser whose role it will be to determine whether the country is ready or not.
Pre-empting potential criticisms about his organisation stepping outside its lane, he argued that national preparedness is a veterans’ issue.
“This is the lane. It always has been. How well this country prepares itself is a veterans’ issue, because veterans and their families are among the people who pay when it does not.”
Acknowledging the work that has been done across sectors in producing analysis, the RSL leader called for that to be turned into action.
“What we do not have is a standing national function that turns those judgements into preparation, exercises and accountability. A strategy does not become a capability simply because it has been published.”
He also credited the government for its National Defence Strategy, released in April, which allocated the work of national preparedness logically while also demonstrating the precise challenge his organisation is seeking to address.
“I have no anxiety at all about how Australians will behave when the time comes. That is not what worries me. What worries me is what we will have ready for them when they do,” Mr Tinley said.
with AAP