Standing in judgement
"To judge is to decide and to decide is to cut off other possibilities"

I would like to reply to a letter in Navy News Edition 22, Volume 44 (November 12, 2001), concerning WOCSM John Flage comments, HMAS Stirling .

It's a shame that still even in today's Defence and society, that personnel are still to be judged without being given the benefit of doubt. It saddens myself and quite a number of friends and fellow workers that judgement and presumption should be shown so flamboyantly.

I would like to ask what harm there is in placing an article in the paper which shows that even though we are in the Defence Force we can still live and behave like normal beings and have a little fun, I feel sorry for those that condemn me for that.

I would like to clear up your questions, I would have preferred you to ring me, and not display your thoughts in the public eye.

When I was asked the question in regards to "fraternising in the work place" there was no question of "Current Work Place or Naval either" within the comment. Yes, I am currently employed by two Defence employers. I was also employed prior to joining the RAN.

I would also like to mention that during those questions, which my work "opos" had put together for me, I had asked for someone to give me the definition of the word "compromising". Yes I did answer the question truthfully.

The Navy News printed what they did, even though the contents were not 100 percent correct, as the first question was totally wrong. I had a lot of fun, and also there was a lot of jest, I apologise that it came across to you the way that it did.

I do not feel embarrassed as a non commissioned officer, I am proud that we can show junior sailors that we are human and not robots as we were back in the 80's.

I would also like to mention that I was encouraged and congratulated by a number of people inside and outside Defence.

It is a shame that even the Navy News has been judged on their choice of articles or how they portrayed it. Maybe we should suggest that prior to printing stories in the future, that the crew of Navy News check to see if the articles content is correct.

I am only human which I would like to believe is OK in today's society.

POSTD Holmes
HMAS Waterhen

To loot or leut
Further to the 12 November "Historical Highlights" I have been unable to satisfactorily answer the question posed to me by a TS Centaur member as to the correct pronounciation of the word "Lieutenant".

Despite extensive research by the member in question (including posting the question on the ANC website) there seems to be no consensus.

Is it "Lieu"-tenant or "Left"-enant - and why the difference between the services, RN and USN?

Perhaps LEUT (pronounced "Loot) Lewis could shed some light on the matter.

John Wenban
LCDR RFD* RAN (Ret'd)

Ed. Can anyone shed light on this one.

Super sailor
The official article on page 4 of Navy News of October 29, 2001 titled 'committee hears sailor super worries' seemed to blame the poor sailor (read sailor, soldier, airman, of all ranks) for having some concern about his superannuation. The article was all good stuff and probably accurate, but can do little to assuage members' concerns. The Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Reference Committee was mentioned as holding public hearings about recruitment and retention issues and yet the article was about superannuation.

More to the point of superannuation issues, early this year the Senate Select Committee on Superannuation and Financial Services held an inquiry into 'Commonwealth and Defence Force Unfunded Superannuation Funds and Schemes.' One of the terms of reference for this inquiry was 'the method of indexation used by trustees to preserve the real value of a fund members' preserved unfunded component of their employer benefit'. Submissions to the committee were scathing in their condemnation of the way the preserved employer benefit was treated.

Statistics show that over seventy per cent of ADF members separating in recent times have served ten years or less and this means if they are MSBS contributors their unfunded employer benefit is calculated at the time of separation and theoretically grows at the CPI rate until the member reaches preservation age. CPI alone does not preserve the value of benefits, a view with which the committee agreed. In the submission by the Regular Defence Force Welfare Association, we argued for this employer benefit to be realised at the time of separation and retained by the trustees in a fund which could grow at commercial rates of interest and not merely the CPI. This would give the member a larger benefit at preservation age and would significantly reduce the Government's unfunded liability. We reinforced this argument at the public hearings held by the Senate Select Committee.

RDFWA will continue to argue for the various anomalies in the military superannuation schemes to be corrected just as we pushed for, and recently won, twice year indexation of military pensions.

RDFWA is the ex-service organisation whose objects are solely for the benefit of serving and retired regular members of the ADF. That's why the RDFWA should be the 'first port of call' for those who need help or advice in matters relating to their service in the ADF. Details about the RDFWA can be found on our website at www.rdfwa.org.au.

John Paule
National Secretary, RDFWA

Phil Charley, Director Superannuation replies:
While many written submissions were made and comments were invited during public hearings, your readers should be aware that neither the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee nor the Senate Select Committee on Superannuation and Financial Services discussed the issue in their reports or made any recommendations about the MSBS preserved employer benefit.

When an MSBS member leaves the ADF, particularly for a member who does not serve to compulsory retiring age, some part of their superannuation entitlement will have to be preserved until they retire from the workforce. Their MSBS employer benefit, for example, must remain in the MSBS until the member reaches age 55. Only part of that benefit is funded and as AVM Paule has noted, that part of the benefit grows in line with changes in the CPI.

The issue was addressed in Navy News on December 11, 2000 and I would draw readers' attention to the letter from the former Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence, Bruce Scott where the issue was comprehensively explored. That edition also included comments on the MSBS from Paul Clitheroe.

Two key issues that the Minister noted were that the way the preserved MSBS employer benefit is treated is a fundamental part of the MSBS scheme design, and the cost associated with bringing forward the funding of the benefit.

To seek to change that part of the scheme design may mean that other parts or the whole of the scheme benefits would have to be examined and changed. More to the point, to fund the benefits today as requested by AVM Paule would require the Government to find around $1 billion. I suggest that would be very difficult to do.

I should end by saying that the MSBS is an excellent superannuation scheme. It provides a range of benefits specifically designed with the needs of the ADF in mind and that are not generally available in other Australian superannuation scheme. In particular readers should note that MSBS provides:

an employee benefit calculated in the last three years of service, complemented by an excellent employer benefit accrual rate;

Excellent insurance coverage;

No fees or charges payable by the member;

Attractive lump sum/pension conversion rates;

A member benefit that accumulates separately.

Adelaide answer
With reference to Navy News edition of September 17, 2001 under the head 'Adelaide buff seeks help', I am pleased to assist with some information in reference to HMAS Adelaide(1) 1922-1946.

I have a history of Adelaide(1) a short history of the light cruiser written by LEUT Greg Swinden, RAN, which was available from the Naval Historical Society of Australia, PO Box 3, Garden Island, NSW 2000.

Gordon White
Aspendale, Vic.

Blessings for deployed
As once again the men and women of the Defence Force continue to fulfil their vocation and respond to the call of duty, I, and my chaplains , wish to assure you of our wholehearted affirmation and prayerful support.

We are proud of you and deem it a great privilege to serve you and your families as best we can and as circumstances allow.

As you join in the active endeavour to combat and overcome terrorism and injustice, we pray for your success and that you will help achieve lasting peace for our troubled times.

May the good Lord protect one and all and bring you safely home to your loved ones.

With every blessing.

G.F. Mayne
Catholic Bishop of the Australian Defence Force.