Letters to the Editor

You're Gurkhan
ADF medalling
Special needs that don't change

How to write to Army News

At a cinema near you, Fahrenheit 9/11.

Photo by Pte Shannon Joyce, Army newspaper

Too hot to handle?

I AM somewhat bemused about the recent ban on the screening of Michael Moore's film Fahrenheit 9/11 at ADF military bases.

Can I seek clarification from the unnamed Defence Department spokesman who provided comment to the Sydney Morning Herald journalist, Tom Allard (July 27), that "it is not appropriate for Defence to be seen to be supporting any film of an overtly political nature ... ADF members are free to choose whether to see the film in their free time".

A few issues here: How does screening a film such as this relate to supporting its content? Does this mean that Defence supports every film that is or has been screened on a Defence base?

What about other politically attuned movies such as Gandhi, Salvador, The Candidate, Dave, JFK and Michael Collins - would Defence disallow the screening of these films for the same reason?

The Defence spokesman's comment that ADF members are free to view Fahrenheit 9/11 in "their free time" is odd.

I thought the aim of having cinemas on bases was to entertain ADF members and families in their free time.

The ADF prides itself on attracting and maintaining personnel with key qualities and abilities such as flexibility, knowledge, common sense and the ability to critically reflect.

In order to make an informed decision on any issue, consideration is required from all available sources. Whether or not this film may lack critical analysis to support its conclusions, it nevertheless may contribute to individuals forming a comprehensive assessment on the issue.

Is the banning of films such as Fahrenheit 9/11 at ADF bases contributing to ADF personnel's inability to make a comprehensive assessment on this issue? .

Maj Damian Cox TC-A, Vice

Brig Mike Hannan, DGMPA replies:

Maj Cox shouldn't believe everything he reads in the paper (Army excepted).

Selection of films for Defence's 13 on-base theatres is done under local arrangements.

There is no central policy to govern it and there has been no direction given in relation to Fahrenheit 9/11.

What did happen was that the distributor sought our agreement to show the film for free on Defence bases.

To accept the offer and therefore promote a highly political film such as this, would be to involve Defence in the political debate.

For this reason I rejected the distributor's offer of free showings.

If Maj Cox wants to see the film, he should pay his money at the local cinema or request his cinema committee show it on base under the usual commercial arrangements.

You're Gurkhan

IN AN article titled On Gurkha Ground, on Page 9 of Army [Edition 1099] June 17 2004, the paragraph reads "Australians from Rifle Company Butterworth 65 (RCB65) recently completed a combined exercise with the 4th Battalion Royal Malay Regt (Gurkha) as part of their three month tour".

Why is the Malay Regt called Gurkha?

Gurkha regiments, I thought, were a part of the British Army, not the Malaysian Army.

Capt Bhala Rai Adjt SME, NSW

Very good question, we've got a crack team of reporters on it to get the full story - Editor

TOP

ADF medalling

I RECENTLY read the latest press release from the former Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence, Mal Brough with regards to the new Australian Defence Medal.

It indicated the medal would be retrospective from the end of WW2 and those who had served for a total of six years in the Australian Defence Force, regular or reserve, would be eligible with the medal being backdated to recognise past service.

It also stated that an estimated 400,000 ex-servicemen and women may apply for this medal with the issuing of medals beginning around middle of 2005.

That six years reflects a length of time that we could be reasonably certain that most people would have completed the requisite training and experience in the regular or reserve forces, to be considered fully deployable should they have been called upon.

Most of us who have served in GRes units will know that at no fault to individual GRes members, in some cases six years is not necessarily a reasonable time.

Is it the intention now to have up to 400,000 both ex-servicemen and women and current serving personnel apply for this medal? How will the priority for awarding the new medals be determined?

Will it start with serving members, or will it be chronological?

It mentioned the issuing of medals would begin in 2005, but what measures will be implemented to clear the current backlog of issuing of medals not operational)?

What I, along with many other colleagues, have to ask - and please don't refer me to a departmental document is that after serving your mandatory qualifying period for Long Service Medals entitlement (was 15 years, soon to be six), why do serving members have to apply to receive their entitlement and fill in another piece of paperwork?

Otherwise why don't we apply for our leave? With all our automated systems we have in place, why a report of whom is to receive an entitlement cannot be generated in advance, is beyond me and it appears others.

Sgt Peter Duncombe Tank Program
DMO Victoria Barracks,
Melbourne

The Directorate of Honours and Awards will not be answering questions about the Defence Medal at this stage as terms of issue are not yet fully determined.

Please hold your comments until DHon&A release the final conditions of the medal - Editor

TOP

Special needs that don't change

UPON entering the ADF I applied for special needs for my wife who suffers from Epilepsy, a life-long illness with no cure. We require certain housing needs which DHA have given us in the past five years.

However, we have now been informed that every two years we are required to submit medical documents and proof that my wife still suffers from epilepsy to enable us to still be recognised as "special needs".

This is all well and good, but do we get re-embursed on the cost to see a neurosurgeon? I think not.

The cost of visits and tests can run up to $1000+.

Why is it necessary to prove that she still has epilepsy when there is no cure? We are not the only ones that have this problem.

Every "Special Needs" family is required to give proof, even those with disabled children.Why can we not be permanently recognised.

A life-long illness means just that.

Pte R.M Rodway 7CSSB

Response from Director General DCO, Janet Stodulka.

Pte Rodway's letter has raised concerns about the requirements of the DI(G) Pers 42-5 Support to Families with Special Needs .

This policy aims to help ADF members who have a family member with a special need to access assistance and specialist services that are disrupted as a result of posting.

In 2000 and 2003 the policy was reviewed and updated after extensive consultation with the Defence Special Needs Support Group, commanders, DHA and special needs families.

The most recent policy was promulgated in January 2004.

An outcome of these reviews was the inclusion of a process of assessment on each posting of the needs of the family member with the special need.

This assessment ensures that Defence has an accurate understanding of the special need and the specialist services received in the old location.

This enables updated advice and support to be provided by DCO as well as provides accountability for expenditure of Commonwealth funds for the provision of particular specialist respite and therapy services in the new location.

If there is no need to access such specialist services, or there are no particular housing requirements in the new location, the member can choose not to undertake the assessment on posting.

The assessment of assistance on posting is a straightforward process of completing the relevant form available from the DRN, or through your local Defence Community Organisation (DCO) office, and providing this to a social worker at DCO. Supporting medical or other documentation should be less than two years old.

If the supporting documentation is older than two years, then this will need to be updated from the treating specialist.

The exception to this is that the DGDCO has discretion to accept documentation from a specialist medical officer that is less than five years old if documentation relates to a permanent condition.

While it is acknowledged that there is frustration in having to provide updated medical and other information when the special need is permanent, there are many circumstances where the symptoms and impacts for the individual can change and/or deteriorate.

Without updated information, Defence is unaware and unable to provide accurate levels of assistance.

DCO welcomes feedback in relation to how the Special Needs policy could be improved in an effort to ensure it is as effective as possible.

Pte Rodway enquires whether Defence will reimburse him for the medical specialist's services.

The policy does not give the Department of Defence the authority to do so.

TOP

Medal madness
I NOTICED that in the Queen's birthday honours list, printed in Army June 17 [edition number 1099] that the officers' team is leading the combined ORs'/SNCOs' team by 29 to 12.

Only when the ORs'/SNCOs' team is permitted to approve its own recommendations will the score line appear balanced.
WO2 Trevor Lynch Coy 5/7RAR, Darwin NT

Ripping yarn
YOUR article with 4RAR M60 gunner John Meehan was exactly the kind of ripping yarn that should be gracing the pages of Army.

What about some close combat interviews from more recent times, such as 1RAR in Somalia, SASR/ 2 Cav counter ambush in Timor, SASR on Operation Anaconda?

Capt T Linsley HQ TC-A

A clasp of the situation
I AM writing in response to the recent letter by Mr Casey You don't choose your battles, regarding the award of the AASM for service in Namibia.

Mr Casey included reference to the ICB in his letter.

The ICB has nothing to do with this particular issue. Service in Namibia was declared as Warlike therefore the ASM for service in Namibia was an anomaly in the Australian Honours and Awards system.

On review the ASM was upgraded to the AASM because subsequent Peace Operations (Balkans, Cambodia and East Timor) that were declared Warlike had been awarded the AASM.

The Australian Honours and Awards system allows for only the AASM with clasp Namibia.

There is no longer the ASM with clasp Namibia. The Government has awarded the AASM for service in Namibia so those who continue to wear the ASM are displaying the incorrect medal for this area of operations.

Upgrade to the AASM because "you don't choose your medals!"

WO1 C.D.
Moon Engineer Adviser
Republic of Fiji Military Forcests.

Pooly reported
IN REGARDS to the article For fighting fit Army, [Edition 1101] July 15, 2004.

I would like to set the record straight in regards to one of the comments in this article.

Lt Liebich did a fantastic job in the prevention and rehabilitation of injured AUSBATT soldiers, and did instruct on the Sports Trainers Course, but she did not build the mini hydrotherapy pool.

This 'hydrotherapy pool' was constructed by the senior NCOs of the AUSBATT VII (5/7RAR).

As the major driving force behind this construction I would like to formally thank all those who assisted in its construction.

Sgt Greg Ralph RAP Sgt
2 Cav Regt

TOP

HOW TO WRITE TO ARMY NEWS

It is the right of all soldiers to correspond with Army. Soldiers wishing to air their views through letters to the editor have access to the newspaper without using the chain of command.

Letters will be edited for spelling and grammatical errors and newspaper style, and may be edited for space.

Preference is given to typed letters of fewer than 300 words. Letters will be rejected where they are too long, abusive, cover a subject that has been exhausted or can be answered in the author’s unit.

They will be published only when they include the author’s name, unit (where applicable), location and contact number.

Send letters to: The Editor, Army Newspaper, R8-LG-029, Russell Offices, Dept of Defence, Canberra, ACT 2600. Phone (02) 6266 7612, fax (02) 6265 6690 or e-mail : armynews@defencenews.gov.au (Please note this is not an internal e-mail address and therefore requires Sec: Unclassified in the subject line when sending from a DRN terminal)

The opinions expressed in letters to the editor do not represent the views of the editor or the Army.