The following formal submission have been made public
Submitter: Josephite Justice NetworkAnzac Hall and Glazed Link
I wish to delete the submission from the Josephite Justice Network that I sent last night and replace it with this one:
Submission to
Australian War Memorial Main Works Consultation
This submission is presented on behalf of the Josephite Justice Office, a ministry of the Congregations of the Sisters of St Joseph. The Sisters of St Joseph and our Associates (numbering approximately three thousand women and men) were founded in the mid-nineteenth century by Mary MacKillop and Julian Woods to work with those suffering from poverty and social disadvantage. We serve, educate, advocate and work for justice, for earth and for people, and especially for those pushed to the margins of our world.
The Josephite Justice Network opposes the excessive re-development of the Australian War Memorial. There has not been proper national debate about it, it will do little to improve veterans’ lives, and it will further glorify war. It should be a place of reflection and commemoration, not a showcase for major donors: arms dealers.
DEBATE
Australians are having an unnecessary expansion of the national war memorial foisted on them without a proper national debate. Submissions are not adequate for this task. Instead, the Australian War Memorial Act should be properly debated, including in the Parliament, as occurred before the 1980 Act came into force.
There were earlier submissions in 2020, most of which opposed the re-development. Two former heads of the Memorial, former ambassadors, several ex-departmental secretaries, 82 historians, former diplomats, public servants, academics, journalists and curators opposed it, among others arguing against the re-development in the list of 600 submissions. It is extraordinary that the plans have gone ahead in the face of so many well-founded arguments against the proposal put forward by such experts.
VETERANS
The number of suicides among returned service personnel and the prevalence of PTSD in veterans indicates that it is the people who served the nation in war who should be be the recipients of as much financial recompense as possible. To spend $500 million on the re-development is a waste of money. Any “therapeutic role” provided by the Memorial is minimal relative to the suffering of veterans. Visits to the Memorial – or the knowledge that it exists – are unlikely to save lives or dispel depression.
Furthermore, the Memorial is a place for all Australians, not just for the Armed Services and Veterans.
A SHOWCASE for ARMS TRADERS
The purpose of a War Memorial is to honour the memory of those who died and to serve as a place of reflection on war itself.
It should not be a place to showcase instruments of death or to have the facilities to house aeroplanes, helicopters, armoured vehicles and other such equipment inside galleries. It is disturbing that weapons companies such as Lockheed Martin, Thales, BAE Systems, Boeing and Leidos are listed among the War Memorials’ donors, and that the amounts they have donated are concealed. The involvement of these arms traders underlines the highly questionable nature of the excessive re-development. The influence of arms dealers the world over supports the continuation and increase of violent conflict. The association of these companies with the Australian War Memorial takes from the concept of commemoration and adds to the glorification of war and its instruments.
National Capital Plan (NCP
The Josephite Justice Network wishes to know how the National Capital Plan (NCP) is not ignored by this re-development.
In its Principles for Objective one – Urban design and heritage, the NCP requires that “Substantial works of architecture, engineering and landscape within the Territory should be designed to contribute positively to the overall composition, symbolism and dignity of the National Capital.”
The points previously raised pose substantial challenges to this requirement. This is a development in the capital of Australia about which experts have raised serious questions and which excludes a national and parliamentary debate about its worth. The expenditure of a great amount of money much of it donated by arms dealers, drastically undermines the symbolism of the Memorial and of the Capital. National symbols are meant to evoke cohesion among people and a commitment to those values which words are inadequate to describe. Magnificent architecture and state-of-the-art displays do not enhance the dignity of any place that accepts the escalating violence of modern warfare as a feasible means of attaining future peace.
The War Memorial is one place in Canberra where many schoolchildren from across Australia are taken on excursions. The presentation of huge displays featuring instruments of death and destruction simply reinforces in children’s minds that violence is the answer to all conflicts. As they already have a never-ending diet of the cycle of revenge and violence on the internet, they don’t need militarism and the notion of “might-is-right” reinforced by the National Capital Authority. The War Memorial should actively oppose the ennoblement of war and the weapons that enable it.
The War Memorial should be a Memorial.
Sister Susan Connelly PhD
10 September 2021
Submission to
Australian War Memorial Main Works Consultation
This submission is presented on behalf of the Josephite Justice Office, a ministry of the Congregations of the Sisters of St Joseph. The Sisters of St Joseph and our Associates (numbering approximately three thousand women and men) were founded in the mid-nineteenth century by Mary MacKillop and Julian Woods to work with those suffering from poverty and social disadvantage. We serve, educate, advocate and work for justice, for earth and for people, and especially for those pushed to the margins of our world.
The Josephite Justice Network opposes the excessive re-development of the Australian War Memorial. There has not been proper national debate about it, it will do little to improve veterans’ lives, and it will further glorify war. It should be a place of reflection and commemoration, not a showcase for major donors: arms dealers.
DEBATE
Australians are having an unnecessary expansion of the national war memorial foisted on them without a proper national debate. Submissions are not adequate for this task. Instead, the Australian War Memorial Act should be properly debated, including in the Parliament, as occurred before the 1980 Act came into force.
There were earlier submissions in 2020, most of which opposed the re-development. Two former heads of the Memorial, former ambassadors, several ex-departmental secretaries, 82 historians, former diplomats, public servants, academics, journalists and curators opposed it, among others arguing against the re-development in the list of 600 submissions. It is extraordinary that the plans have gone ahead in the face of so many well-founded arguments against the proposal put forward by such experts.
VETERANS
The number of suicides among returned service personnel and the prevalence of PTSD in veterans indicates that it is the people who served the nation in war who should be be the recipients of as much financial recompense as possible. To spend $500 million on the re-development is a waste of money. Any “therapeutic role” provided by the Memorial is minimal relative to the suffering of veterans. Visits to the Memorial – or the knowledge that it exists – are unlikely to save lives or dispel depression.
Furthermore, the Memorial is a place for all Australians, not just for the Armed Services and Veterans.
A SHOWCASE for ARMS TRADERS
The purpose of a War Memorial is to honour the memory of those who died and to serve as a place of reflection on war itself.
It should not be a place to showcase instruments of death or to have the facilities to house aeroplanes, helicopters, armoured vehicles and other such equipment inside galleries. It is disturbing that weapons companies such as Lockheed Martin, Thales, BAE Systems, Boeing and Leidos are listed among the War Memorials’ donors, and that the amounts they have donated are concealed. The involvement of these arms traders underlines the highly questionable nature of the excessive re-development. The influence of arms dealers the world over supports the continuation and increase of violent conflict. The association of these companies with the Australian War Memorial takes from the concept of commemoration and adds to the glorification of war and its instruments.
National Capital Plan (NCP
The Josephite Justice Network wishes to know how the National Capital Plan (NCP) is not ignored by this re-development.
In its Principles for Objective one – Urban design and heritage, the NCP requires that “Substantial works of architecture, engineering and landscape within the Territory should be designed to contribute positively to the overall composition, symbolism and dignity of the National Capital.”
The points previously raised pose substantial challenges to this requirement. This is a development in the capital of Australia about which experts have raised serious questions and which excludes a national and parliamentary debate about its worth. The expenditure of a great amount of money much of it donated by arms dealers, drastically undermines the symbolism of the Memorial and of the Capital. National symbols are meant to evoke cohesion among people and a commitment to those values which words are inadequate to describe. Magnificent architecture and state-of-the-art displays do not enhance the dignity of any place that accepts the escalating violence of modern warfare as a feasible means of attaining future peace.
The War Memorial is one place in Canberra where many schoolchildren from across Australia are taken on excursions. The presentation of huge displays featuring instruments of death and destruction simply reinforces in children’s minds that violence is the answer to all conflicts. As they already have a never-ending diet of the cycle of revenge and violence on the internet, they don’t need militarism and the notion of “might-is-right” reinforced by the National Capital Authority. The War Memorial should actively oppose the ennoblement of war and the weapons that enable it.
The War Memorial should be a Memorial.
Sister Susan Connelly PhD
10 September 2021