Opinion – A Virus called Political Correctness

How ironic is it that on each Remembrance Day, we pause to honour those who made the supreme sacrifice to defend our most precious way of life, and yet continue to yawn and scratch as an increasing number of misguided fools are busily hell bent on destroying such a beautiful legacy.
How blind are we that we can reflect with pride on the unity of our nation as it once was, and yet today before our very eyes, fail to see it fracturing at a rapid rate.

How ignorant are we not to understand that our nation has been forged on the fundamentals of Christian beliefs that provided a true compass for our social discipline and intent. Where is the evil in a man (person?) who offered the gift “to love one another?”

How cowardly are we to tolerate increasing defiance of our laws which were established to ensure protection of all law abiding citizens?  How pathetic we are not to demand harsher penalties.

Above all, how irresponsible are many of us to readily accept the good things of living in a western society yet fail to confront the insidious threats to it.

One such enemy is a dreaded virus defined as political correctness which is cleverly designed to slowly but surely brainwash our young generations and those yet to arrive on Planet Earth.

Thus I do hope that this outburst and my scribble below is a timely reminder to those not yet infected.

Sadly, it is too late for most of our political representatives at State and National level.  They are already in the morgue and all we have to do is bury them.

 

George Mansford

 

                      One Upon a Time

Poor old Gingerbread Man, loved by many and killed this very day

Thanks to Revisionists, a brand new Gingerbread Person is on its way

Stolen and distorted are nursery rhymes loved ever since creation

Sly thieves claim such words are cruel with personal degradation

How sad that fairy tales are not what they used to be

Thanks to political correctness infecting our society

Taken away is the innocence of childhood which is surely wrong   

No more to read of Giants and Dwarfs and sing the Black Sheep song

A sin to dream of fairy tales, secret wishes, and Christmas soon  

So silly to believe there’s a man smiling from the magic moon

It’s old fashioned to happily sing the ABC and finally get it right

Increasing scorn for small prayers before going to sleep at night

And as well, no more “Ladies and Gentlemen“ or “He and She”

When youngsters seek work, there will be quotas, despite ability

Santa’s on the hit list and birth certificates minus gender are planned

Identity cards will not reveal if you are woman or man 

Instead of unity, division grows and common sense is not to be

Soon a land of cheerless robots and no happy infants running free

 

The questions which must be answered by our elected masters

Who are these authors of change and what authority now and after?

What reason to condone such madness within our nation?

Who of our elected leaders will stand up to fight such alterations?

Will we pretend it’s not happening, stay mute and keep out of sight?

Hide in the growing darkness and not to fight for what is right?

Oops, the thought police are knocking on my door so I must be away

George Mansford © October 2018

DFRDB e-Petition to the Government – Commutation Anomaly

This petition goes directly to the Parliament.  All servicemen,servicewomen, their spouses widows/widowers, who contributed to the DFRDB scheme are affected by this anomaly, Even our partners will be paying this impost until they die if we predecease them.

 This  is an opportunity for you and your partner to have your say and help correct this anomaly. And if it doesn’t affect you then please help those who are affected by signing the petition

PLEASE SIGN & VERIFY THE PETITION NOW  

THE PETITION
Defence Veterans of Australia, as Commutation recipients of the DFRDB Scheme administered by Commonwealth Superannuation Corporation, petition the House of Representatives to  instate the National Life Expectancy data  point of each affected veteran as the point where full reinstatement of their Commutation obligation is fulfilled: and, to reimburse to each DFRDB veteran, all over-subscribed payments forfeited by direct debit by them, once their original lump sum was repaid in full.

The DFRDB Authority failed to disclose to veterans the whole-of-life impost of a Lump Sum Commutation   on superannuation payments reduced by a factor, based on redundant Notional Life Expectancy  data and an individual’s Service data. Limited disclosure of the whole-of-life deductions was made by DFRDB,  37 years after the Scheme was launched, but never to members so affected.
Direct debit by DFRDB has been incremented and escalated over time, to a level where the original lump sum has been reimbursed multiple times. This effectively means that veterans are subsidising their own benefits.
There was no definition of the term ‘commutation’ within the legislation or in any document provided by DFRDB to superannuants, until its disclosure advised above. The direct debits were shown in the legislation and the DFRDB’s Administrative Manual to be a finite amount, not an escalating continuum .
On advice from DFRDB Administration all superannuants understood Commutation as an advance of Benefits to be reimbursed to DFRDB by fortnightly debits over a finite period and at a finite rate. How deluded Veterans were through DFRDB’s failure to disclose their interpretation of the Legislation, before the fact, thereby committing Veterans to an ever increasing, spiraling, life-term DEBT-SENTENCE.

 

Chaplain Gary Stone Speaks out on Recognition of RCB Service 1970-1989

As a veteran of almost 48 yrs military service, the last 24 of which I served as a Chaplain , I must raise my grave concerns about the morality of the treatment of our veterans by ADF and Government officials in their continuing rejection of the substantive evidence being presented by the RCB Review Group in their case for recognition of warlike service.

In my 4 years of training at RMC Duntroon, I was grounded in the need in public service, for uncompromising integrity, and the reality that sometimes oversights and mistakes are made because of inadequate or insufficient information, and the need for these to be corrected. There are plenty of precedents of recognition being granted belatedly, and the previously Secret evidence now available in relation to RCB, should provide scope for this case to be considered anew.

But it is not.
As this case goes on, what seems clear is that advisors and public servants are deliberately ignoring evidence and giving bad advice and recommendations to senior ADF officers and Ministers.
Some might construe this as a cover up of earlier mistakes. Nevertheless, we are now at a point where litigation may be required to correct the injustices felt by the members who served at RCB.
At the very least, a group of more than 10,000 veterans is experiencing unnecessary stress and dismay at the unjust way in which they are being treated.
Australians rightly expect to be given a fair go and fair hearing, and these veterans will not stop in their pleading until justice is granted them.
They have now seen The Defence Committee Minutes of 11 Jan 1973, and other official documents confirming irrefutably that this was an operational deployment to protect RAAF personnel and assets at Air Base Butterworth when a war was being fought from this base against communist insurgents.

We did no training with the Malaysians. We were totally focussed on defence of the airbase, and reacting to any communist incursions.
But of course the veterans already knew this, from briefings on the Air Base and from being “Warned for Active Service” before they deployed. Many were Vietnam or Borneo Veterans who have given testimony that their service in Butterworth met the requirements that saw them given Active Service recognition in earlier conflicts.

Others like me, an Infantry Platoon Commander at Butterworth in 1974-75 went on to serve in other conflicts ( in my case 6 other operational theatres) and subsequently got recognition for warlike service for similar service as at Butterworth.

But this case should stand or fall on evidence, rather than subjective opinions and the full evidence now needs to be considered, and the mistakes of the past need to be corrected.

What was a simple nature of service claim has now become also a case for ethical conduct or misconduct, which will have wider ramifications for Government and officials than recognising the faithful service of some patriotic veterans.
I would hope that those desiring an ethical consideration of this case will now act appropriately .
Yours Sincerely

Gary Stone
President Veterans Care Association

Battle rages for Diggers – RCB veterans have not surrendered nor will they…

ON the night of December 7-8 1941, Japanese forces began invading Malaya, hours before the attack on US territory Pearl Harbour,
Australia’s first casualties on December 8 were the crews of two 1Sqn RAAF Hudson bombers from six aircraft dispatched to bomb Japan’s invasion fleet.
When Japanese aircraft attacked Butterworth, some RAAF Buffaloes were in the air and tried to intercept, but they were an inadequate match for the speedy Japanese fighters.
The ADF has maintained a long relationship with Butterworth, through the first Malayan Emergency 1950-1960, Confrontation, Vietnam and the second Malaysian Emergency (Counter Insurgency War 1969-1989) to the present day.
From 1958 to 1988 the airfield was an Australian military asset, known formally as RAAF Butterworth.
From 1970 an Australian Army infantry company has been deployed to Butterworth, though successive Australian governments have employed various subterfuges to camouflage their real role.
Although the deployment was officially described as training with Malaysian forces, its actual, formally denied role was to be a ready reaction force to defend, if required, the RAAF assets including Mirage fighters based there.
There is no doubt until 1989 there was a real threat to Australian personnel and assets based at Butterworth, nor that RCB was established and armed to react to that threat should it eventuate.
Yet successive Australian governments have consistently refused to recognise RCB service as warlike, and concede appropriate veteran benefits to those who served in that period.
The RCB veterans lobby group, have gathered a massive database of previously classified material which indubitably supports their claims for recognition.
They will not rest until they clear the fog of bureaucratic and political obfuscation which continues to deny their evidence.

READ  ROSS EASTGATE’S FULL ARTICLE

Note a correction to the article: Robert Cross is the RCB’s veterans lobby group (RCB Review Group) leader of which Ted Chitham (past CO 8/9 RAR 1974-1976) is a member.

“RCB veterans have not surrendered nor will they…” Ross Eastgate

RCB Service Recognition – Senator Anning’s Questions to Marise Payne

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.

Senate’s Support of a Australian Military Covenant Welcomed

The Defence Force Welfare Association (DFWA), together with not only its partners in the Alliance of Defence Service Organisations (ADSO) but also with the support of the Returned and Services League of Australia, have long advocated the need to formally recognise the unique nature of military service through a legislated Australian Military Covenant.

A motion for adopting such a Covenant was moved in the Senate and passed on Wednesday 12 September 2018. In commenting on the welcome development, the Association’s National President, Kel Ryan, wished to congratulate Katter’s Australia Party Senator Fraser Anning for his initiative in proposing the motion, stating that: “bi partisan effort should now be applied to make sure that legislative processes for the proposed Australian Military Covenant could finalized in time for the 100th anniversary of the Armistice marking cessation of hostilities in the Great War”.

Kel wished to also acknowledge both the Government’s and the Labor Opposition’s support for a Military Covenant, each progressing towards enshrining the mutual obligations between the Nation and its servicemen and servicewomen and placing on public record the Nation’s enduring obligations to those who currently serve and those who once served in the Australian Defence Force (ADF).

He proffered that: “the Covenant would promote greater awareness and understanding of the demands placed on ADF members and dovetail in perfectly with the Prime Minister’s employment initiative because ADF members are a national resource that can bring enormous value to the Australian workforce and, if properly harnessed, will significantly enhance the skill sets in Australian commercial enterprises for the benefit of the nation and its economic competitiveness”.

Contacts

Anning Continues to Fight for Veterans Covenant

During Question Time today, outspoken KAP Senator for Queensland Fraser Sen AnningAnning kept the pressure on the Government ensuring they legislated an Australian Military Covenant. Speaking afterwards, Senator Anning expressed his frustration at the apparently vague and evasive responses by the Minister.
“After my motion yesterday which called for the legislation of an Australian Military Covenant was passed by the Senate, I continued my push today by questioning Minister Payne on the Governments apparent lethargy.”
“I asked what the Government’s position was on the establishment of the Covenant; however despite the Minister making all the right noises, there was no specific commitment and only a vague reference to the end of 2018.”
“To say the least I am sceptical of her actual commitment, as the Government has had since 2015 to implement anything meaningful and so far they haven’t.”
“If we look at the situation honestly there has been ample time to consult with veterans groups and develop a Covenant which honours our social contract and moral obligation to look after our veterans.”
“It is only now after my strong and continued push along with Labors election promise that the Government is willing to do something.”
“Let’s be clear, there is no further requirement for more “consultation” or the establishment of yet another “working group.” The wording of a draft Australian Military Covenant has been provided already by the veteran’s community.”
“My supplementary question put to the Minister also asked if she was prepared to recognise a reversal of the onus of proof in veteran’s disability claims.”
“The response was not very hopeful.”
“It is very clear that the onus should be reversed and at the very least be the same level of willingness to compensate veterans as Centrelink provides to those seeking welfare,” Senator Anning said.
“As I have said before, our great nation has been built on the backs and sacrifice of our military. Now is the time to stop equivocating, dithering and playing political games. It is now the time for the government to act.”
”What the veteran community deserves is a specific commitment stating when the Government will enshrine the Australian Military Covenant in legislation. Until then, they are just honeyed words and insincere placation,” Senator Anning concluded.
14 September 2018

Katters Australian Party

RARA Comment 

We acknowledge and appreciate Senator Anning’s and  the KAP’s advocacy on veterans’ issues in the Senate.

 

Senator Anning Takes Lead on Adopting the Military Covenant

Today in the Senate, outspoken KAP senator Fraser Anning moved a motion for the establishment and implementation of an Australian Military Covenant.
In essence it is a reciprocal social contract between the nation and those willing to sacrifice rights, liberty and their life to defend that nation. It is a declaration and commitment from the nation to accept responsibility for veterans’ wellbeing after their service is complete.
Speaking after the conclusion of the vote, Senator Anning expressed his delight that his motion passed.
“It is great to see various policy announcements by the major parties however this issue is too important to remain just a policy or election promise.”
“We need multipartisan support from all sides of the political spectrum to ensure that policy announcements and backbench murmurings are turned into action.” Senator Anning said.
“My motion calls on the government to consult with the veteran community then enshrine in legislation an Australian Military Covenant.”
“We have an absolute responsibility as a nation to ensure that our veterans are not abandoned after the completion of their service.” Senator Anning continued.
It is only just that those who risk life and limb to allow us to sleep safe in our beds are looked after by us after their service and not abandoned to fall victim to their wounds, whether physical or psychological.”
“Our great nation has been built on the backs and sacrifice of our military, now is the time to stop dithering and playing political games. It is now the time for the government to act.” Senator Anning concluded.

12 September 2018
Senator Fraser Anning
Senator for Queensland

Labor commits to a Military Covenant

Hello

I am writing to you as the Leader of the Opposition, Bill Shorten MP, and I have recently announced that Labor will commit, if elected, to the establishment of a Military Covenant.

This Covenant recognises the unique nature of military service and our obligation to those who serve our country and their loved ones.

When a person commits their life and their safety to the Australian Defence Force, we in turn undertake a commitment to supporting them and their loved ones both during and after their service.

A Military Covenant is a document signed by the Government and the Chief of the Defence Force which reinforces this commitment. The Covenant will be accompanied by legislation which will require regular reporting to Parliament on how the Government is meeting its obligation to our current and ex-serving defence personnel.

The Military Covenant will stand as a testament to Labor’s commitment to those who are or have served our country.

This builds on Labor’s previous commitments to the current and ex-serving defence community including our $121 million Veterans’ Employment Policy and our Family Engagement and Support Strategy.

Further information on this commitment can be found here.

In addition, as the Shadow Minister for Veterans’ Affairs, I regularly communicate with ex-service organisations and members of the veteran community, if you would like to be kept in the loop, please email me at [email protected]
Yours sincerely

Amanda

Help us in the Case Supporting the CSC Campaign

We believe the The Commonwealth Superannuation Corporation’s (CSC) exclusion from the Royal Commission is wrong and want the Government to reverse its decision.

The CSC  is the Trustee for both our ADF Military Superannuation Schemes (230,000 clients) and the Australian Public Service Schemes (470,000)

 

 

We believe this is wrong and have lobbied the Government for the CSC’s inclusion HERE   The ALP supports our request

It is important to note that members of the ADF cannot elect to have their
superannuation contributions made to a fund of their choice, nor can they transfer
their employer contributions to another superannuation fund. This means that current and former ADF personnel do not have the freedom to move their superannuation to another fund should they be dissatisfied with the Trustee’s conduct.

In recent years, several issues have arisen with respect to the way the  CSC administers the ADF Schemes. Specifically, these issues relate to members who are in receipt of invalidity payments (Veteran Beneficiaries):
    1. the CSC’s inability to administer the ADF Schemes in accordance with  their respective Trust Deeds and governing legislation;
    2. the lack of regulatory review of the CSC’s conduct to ensure that it is meeting its obligations under its Trust Deeds;
    3. the CSC’s persistent failure to conduct itself honestly, fairly and transparently in its dealings with its members/beneficiaries and in accordance with Modal Litigant Rules; and
    4. the CSC’s inability to resolve issues and complaints made by its members in accordance with natural justice principles.

READ THE CASE FOR  CSC INCLUSION

In this document, are specific examples of the CSC’s conduct which has
fallen short of the professional standards and benchmarks of conduct expected not only by a financial services provider, but more importantly, as a Commonwealth Government entity.

We believe that the CSC should receive the same level of scrutiny as any other
financial services entity included in the Royal Commission and by excluding it the
Royal Commission would fail in upholding the fundamental right of all Australians
“to be treated honestly and fairly in their dealings with banking superannuation and financial services providers. The highest standards of conduct are critical to the good governance and corporate culture of those providers.”

You can help us in two immediate ways:

Ring your local MP and register your concern, and

If you have had any adverse experiences in dealings with the CSC then please contact Brad Campbell or email ADSO at [email protected] with details