All News

By political reporter Matthew Doran

The chair of the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide has accused senior military leaders of waiting for his inquiry to end so they can go back to “business as usual”.

Commissioner Nick Kaldas will on Wednesday outline his concerns about the approach taken by Australia’s defence establishment when he addresses the National Press Club in Canberra.

Last week, while wrapping up a block of hearings in Melbourne, the former New South Wales police commissioner took a swipe at the nation’s top brass.

“We commissioners fear the defence hierarchy is simply waiting for this inquiry to end so that it can go back to business as usual,” he said.

“We hope that’s not the case.

“We still have not identified any strong evidence to suggest that defence is prioritising the mental health and wellbeing of its people in a sustainable way, nor does it seem to be responding adequately to the pressing issue of suicide and suicidality in its ranks with any sense of urgency.”

Tasmanian senator and veteran Jacqui Lambie, who is one of the most outspoken defence critics in federal parliament, said Mr Kaldas’s remarks showed deep cultural problems continued to exist.

“The best disinfectant for defence would be to get rid of the garbage at the top,” she told the ABC’s AM program.

“The trouble is you have senior commanders up there that think they are untouchable, and until you flush those senior commanders out, we’re going to continue to have this.

“The only way you can change a culture in an institution like defence is by flushing out the leaders.

“They’ve had plenty of time to fix it, the situation has got worse over the years.”

Karen Bird’s son Jesse died by suicide in 2017, after his claim for compensation for permanent impairment was rejected by the Department of Veterans’ Affairs.

She has been watching the royal commission hearings closely, and she agreed with Mr Kaldas’s sentiments.

“The protection and the lack of transparency has been a real issue for the commissioners,” she said.

“I think the commissioners have just got to keep pushing and keep calling it out.

“I’m not crazy enough or silly enough to believe that we don’t need a defence force, but what we do need is a system that looks after our defence members.”

‘I don’t think he’s excessive or a China plate’

Senator Lambie was full of praise for the way Mr Kaldas and his two fellow commissioners, James Douglas KC and Peggy Brown, have been running the inquiry, encouraging members of the defence community to come forward with their stories.

Shadow Veterans’ Affairs Minister Barnaby Joyce agreed, and argued Mr Kaldas was unlikely to be exaggerating the concerns about defence.

“I don’t think he’s excessive or a China plate who would be looking for dramas where dramas don’t exist,” Mr Joyce said. “I think he’d be very authentic.

“I think he’s clearly saying [defence] have got to take this seriously.

“And if you don’t change your behaviour, then you’ll get the exactly the same outcome as what we’re experiencing.”

Veterans’ Affairs Minister Matt Keogh was not prepared to comment specifically on Mr Kaldas’s remarks.

But in a speech to parliament on legislation relating to the royal commission, Mr Keogh insisted the federal government was serious about driving cultural change.

“We know that people don’t want to see this royal commission drag on,” he said on Tuesday night.

“Veterans, veterans’ families, defence personnel, ex-service organisations — they all want to see timely action.”

In a statement, the Defence Department said it would be inappropriate to comment on what the commissioner had to say because the inquiry is ongoing.

“The mental health and wellbeing of our people is a high priority for Defence,” a spokesperson said.

The royal commission’s next hearings will be in Sydney at the end of the month, with the inquiry’s final report to be delivered by June next year.

September is Prostate Cancer Awareness Month and is a timely reminder to have important conversations about men’s health.

If you are a male, aged 60 or over, there is a strong possibility you, or one of your mates, has or will be diagnosed with prostate cancer at some point in their life.

Prostate Cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in Australia. It affects men in older age groups and is rare in men under 50 years. Research published by the Cancer Council shows by the age of 85 one in six males will have been diagnosed with prostate cancer.

However, it’s not all doom and gloom. 90% of people are diagnosed early and survival is good. Depending on the type and stage, some people don’t need treatment and will be closely monitored instead.

If you’ve been diagnosed by your doctor with prostate cancer and hold a Veteran White Card you might be eligible to receive fully funded cancer treatment under Non-Liability Health Care (NLHC).

Cancer treatment covered under NLHC may include allied health, GP care and specialist care, scans and blood tests, as well as treatment options such as chemotherapy, radiation therapy, surgery or hormone therapy.

Prostate cancer can cause symptoms such as blood in your urine, a weak or interrupted stream, needing to urinate often, pain while urinating, incontinence, pain in the back, or weak legs or feet. These symptoms may have other causes. Talk to your doctor if you have any of these symptoms.

There is no single or simple test for prostate cancer. If you don’t have symptoms, talk to your doctor the pros and cons of the tests available in your individual circumstances. Your doctor or health professional can help you to make an informed decision about being tested.

For more information about prostate cancer testing and treatment see The Prostate Cancer Foundation.

For more information about funded prostate cancer treatment, including eligibility call us on 1800 VETERAN (1800 838 372) or visit Free treatment for cancer and pulmonary tuberculosis | Department of Veterans’ Affairs

From 1970 to 1973, the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) utilized 24 McDonnell Douglas F-4E Phantom II fighter-bombers for ground attack missions. These planes were borrowed from the United States Air Force (USAF) due to unforeseen hold-ups in the delivery of the RAAF’s 24 General Dynamics F-111C bombers. Although the F-4Es showcased notable performance, once the F-111s were in service by 1973, the Australian government declined the RAAF’s suggestion to keep the Phantoms.

In 1963, during a search for a replacement for its English Electric Canberra bombers, the RAAF assessed multiple aircraft, including the F-4C Phantom II variant. However, the F-111 was the preferred choice. Yet, ongoing technical issues with the F-111 during the late 1960s prompted the RAAF to see the F-4E Phantom II as the most suitable alternative. Subsequent to the F-111 delivery setbacks, in 1970, the Australian and US Governments struck a deal allowing the RAAF to lease 24 F-4Es, along with their necessary equipment, from the USAF.

The RAAF introduced their F-4Es in September 1970. These aircraft, deployed for air-to-ground missions, significantly aided in training crews for the impending F-111 operations. Additionally, the intensive training sessions with these jets elevated the RAAF’s operational expertise. Unfortunately, one Phantom met its end in a flight mishap in June 1971, while another was salvaged by the RAAF after a harsh landing caused substantial damage. By June 1973, the 23 remaining Phantoms were handed back to the USAF, with most of them later transformed into F-4G Wild Weasel versions upon their return to the US.

On 6 June 1966, eight Iroquois helicopters, belonging to the 9 Squadron of the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF), made their descent on the Vung Tau airbase in Vietnam. The Bell UH-1B Iroquois, commonly known as the “Huey”, became an emblematic figure of the Vietnam War. For the subsequent five and a half years, these Hueys of the 9 Squadron backed the 1st Australian Task Force (1ATF).

Previously, during World War II, 9 Squadron had been involved in maritime operations. It was later resurrected in 1962 at the Fairbairn air base near Canberra. Alongside 5 Squadron, which had been operating in Malaysia since 1964, they were the RAAF’s primary helicopter squadrons. The initial assumption in March 1966 was that, when a helicopter squadron was designated for Vietnam, it would constitute a new flight unit, mirroring the setup of RAAF Transport Flight Vietnam with its Caribou aircraft. But it was later clarified that the entire 9 Squadron would be deployed to Vietnam, while 5 Squadron would head back to Australia. This led to a restructure at Fairbairn.

In an interesting reshuffle, on 12 April, 9 Squadron transitioned to 5 Squadron. The then-existing 5 Squadron was rebranded as 5 Squadron Detachment C until its disbandment on 29 April. The separate 9 Squadron contingents in Williamtown, NSW, and Darwin were renamed as offshoots of 5 Squadron. Miraculously, 9 Squadron was resurrected on 13 April, adopting eight Iroquois from 5 Squadron. Throughout the war, these two squadrons remained intertwined. Personnel would initially train with 5 Squadron in Australia and subsequently serve in Vietnam under 9 Squadron. 9 Squadron’s journey to Vietnam involved both sea and air, with helicopters and their crews being ferried by the HMAS Sydney, and other personnel traveling via a Qantas chartered flight.

Once stationed at Vung Tau, their primary duty was to facilitate 1ATF by shuttling troops and delivering vital supplies like ammunition, water, and food to units in combat zones. If the Viet Cong (VC) compromised or blocked the Vung Tau-Nui Dat roadway, the squadron partnered with 35 Squadron for resupply operations.

Their missions were multifaceted, including deploying Special Air Service patrols, rescuing injured soldiers, distributing herbicides and pesticides, disseminating leaflets, and executing “people sniffer” recon missions. They played a vital role in all major Australian operations, with a staggering 237,424 missions to their credit. It’s worth noting that from July 1967 to November 1971, the squadron also had 16 officers from the Royal New Zealand Air Force in its ranks.

Despite their commendable reputation and synergy with the army, the early months witnessed some friction, primarily because the air force couldn’t match the army’s anticipations. The Hueys lacked armour, and crews were deprived of flak jackets (which were eventually sourced from American forces). Relations took a positive turn post the Battle of Long Tan in August, marked by the valiant efforts of two squadron helicopters which delivered ammo to Australian forces amid challenging conditions.

By 1968, the squadron’s fleet expanded to 16 Hueys. Four were later adapted into “Bushranger” gunships, equipped with twin 7.62-millimetre mini-guns, rocket launchers, and door-mounted M60 machine-guns, providing pivotal cover and support for landing zones.

Concluding their esteemed service, 9 Squadron executed their final mission on 19 November 1971. The following month saw their 16 Iroquois depart Vung Tau, eventually landing on the HMAS Sydney, marking their journey back home.

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

Legal representatives of the former SAS soldier, Ben Roberts-Smith, are seeking clarification on how sensitive information from his unsuccessful defamation lawsuit against several newspapers will be utilized by war crimes investigators. These publications had reported allegations of Roberts-Smith’s connection to four murders.

The investigative team from Operation Emerald is keen on accessing certain confidential documents that were presented during Roberts-Smith’s legal battle against the Sydney Morning Herald, The Age, and the Canberra Times.

Back in June, the Federal Court had ruled that the allegations presented by the newspapers regarding Roberts-Smith’s supposed involvement in the four murders in Afghanistan were predominantly accurate. While Roberts-Smith has not faced any criminal charges yet, he is challenging Justice Anthony Besanko’s judgment.

The court was informed on Monday that the Office of the Special Investigator, in conjunction with the Australian Federal Police, is currently probing 33 allegations of misconduct by defence personnel in Afghanistan spanning the period from 2005 to 2016.

The formation of the OSI was a direct result of an inquiry by the Inspector-General of the Australian Defence Force into the behaviour of soldiers in Afghanistan.

Investigators are particularly interested in parts of the testimony from individuals who were mandated to provide possibly self-incriminating statements during the inspector-general’s inquiry. Some of these individuals also testified in the defamation lawsuit.

Luke Livingston SC, representing the ex-soldier, expressed concerns in court over the protective immunities for any suspect who had been compelled to provide information during the inspector-general’s inquiry. Livingston also requested to cross-question Ross Barnett, the director of OSI investigations.

In response to Livingston’s concerns, Barnett assured the court that there were robust systems in place to safeguard the integrity of the probes and the rights of those under investigation. However, Livingston challenged this, emphasizing the need for concrete proof that these protective measures were both strong and effective.

There were previous concerns raised by lawyers regarding the handling of information, with calls for related policy documents. Livingston indicated the Commonwealth’s lack of a significant response to these concerns. Jennifer Single SC, representing the Commonwealth, mentioned that it’s highly improbable for any non-protected data to be included in the sensitive court records.

Single acknowledged potential human errors in redacting documents but highlighted existing protective measures. Livingston, however, noted that the repercussions of any unintended disclosure would remain severe. He further commented on the possibility of a lack of established protocols, a detail he deemed critical.

However, Single pointed out that divulging further information might raise security concerns. She emphasized that the decision regarding potential leaks or mishandling of materials should rest with criminal courts.

The court will further discuss the Commonwealth’s proposed amendments to the 2020 national security orders and the access to the sensitive data from Roberts-Smith’s defamation lawsuit on September 27 this year.