Mr BAYLEY – Before I launch into my question, I echo the sentiment. It was a question I was going to ask as well. I’ve heard that and I guess just urge the government about thinking about it and possibly addressing it. There is a win-win here which is making sure that topping up the veterans budget accordingly to make sure that – and explaining that while that prize is funded out of the veterans budget, you know, it’s offset by this additional funding that’s going to veteran services – is a possible win-win there. Because I hear you, there would be others thinking it, but it’s one of the few things I’ve heard as well.
Apart from the Cenotaph, and I have to ask you again, minister, because you know veterans and the RSL that I’ve spoken to are appalled and still ashamed to think that the government is pushing ahead with this proposition. The RSL has been on the record for numerous years now since this proposal was mooted, raising their concerns and feeling as if they were fed absolute platitudes around their concerns. That, not to worry, these will be concerns, this will be designed away. This is fine.
Of course, we now have the Planning Commission’s report which is absolutely unequivocal. It has now accepted that the values of the Cenotaph will be significantly impacted by the construction of the stadium. That will have an impact on the reverential ambience and other values of the site to the point where the RSL again wrote to Upper House members last week to restate their opposition.
I acknowledge I’ve asked you this question in parliament and I acknowledge your answer, but I do have to ask again why the government feels as if it doesn’t have other options to pursue such that it is willing to sacrifice the values of something that I think in just about any other circumstance would be honoured. In just about any other circumstance, the values of the Cenotaph and the views of the RSL would be respected. But for some reason the, the potency of the AFL and them dictating this particular site, and a stadium of a particular size, and with a roof means that this site has to be sacrificed.
I think that is a crying shame and I’ll put it to you again that you know, veterans and the RSL are smarting about this and they’re really looking at the Legislative Council for their integrity to vote the stadium down.
Mr PEARCE – I appreciate your position and I appreciate the positions of many veterans and in fact many members of the RSL. However, there are many others that differ from that position. I was very genuine when I answered your question in parliament Question Time the other day to the degree of importance that sport has on all military members. It’s a part of their daily routine, it’s a training tool, it’s how we encourage, it’s how we put them under physical stress in a lot of cases, and it’s how we put them under physical stress in a team environment. It becomes part of their DNA and they love sport.
Every morning at 0730 is PT. More than often it involves a team game, even at the end of an arduous activity. Every Thursday afternoon is what we call sporties, you go and get to play your designated sport. In my case it was rugby and that’s where my neck went. The point I make very seriously –
Ms BUTLER – Union or league?
Mr PEARCE – Union, sorry. Anyway, what my point is, it’s absolutely – we live and breathe – particularly team sports in the military. The other thing is, I think, if you got the Army together, the Army, Navy and Air Force and asked them who would object to that. I think you’d be surprised at the numbers and they would be overwhelmingly positive.
I want to remember our veterans. I want to remember those that have stood in defence of our country, not just one day a year, but every year. I want them to do that – and I want that to be intrinsic to them. I don’t want to – the worst thing – and I’m not knocking events, Anzac Day and Armistice Day, but that is one special day of the year. I want this thought to be in people’s minds of our veterans, sacrifice and the service that they had for their country every day. If that means every time that they go to something like a sporting event, then the reason that they go there is because of the sacrifice that has gone before them. I don’t think there’s too many diggers. I’m certainly an old digger myself that I would love for people to see that Cenotaph as they walk into or exit from a great sporting event and know that the reason why you’ve got you today is because someone gave their tomorrow. I think that’s my sentiment.
Mr BAYLEY – I think that’s part of the problem, isn’t it? They’re not going to do that. They’re not going to walk into that stadium.
Mr PEARCE – I think they could.
Mr BAYLEY – Well, they’re not. The Planning Commission is unequivocal, and in fact it has the exact opposite of the sentiment you’re expressing, where every day someone can think about and celebrate veterans. You know, every day, not just on Remembrance Day or ANZAC Day, but every day, the values of the Cenotaph are going to be diminished. That’s the point. That’s the finding of the Planning Commission. Part of their recommendation is that every day, every single day, that site as a place of remembrance will be diminished by the stadium.
I guess I ask, it must sit uncomfortably with you as minister? I understand as a federal member, you signed a letter opposing the stadium at some point. I don’t know what the question is at this point because you’ve made your position really clear. You’re happy to see those values impacted by the stadium and happy to, I guess, dismiss the concerns of the RSL.
I put again to you that I hope it sits uncomfortably with you, minister, because veterans and the RSL have again, unequivocally confirmed their opposition to the stadium, at their Congress this year and in writing to Legislative councillors.
Mr PEARCE – Some have.
