VIETNAMESE VETERANS ASSOCIATION OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Mr PENGILLY (Finniss) (11:33): I move:

That this house acknowledges the important contribution that the Vietnamese Veterans Association makes in commemorating and remembering significant dates in the history of the former Republic of South Vietnam.

This is an important issue which I know all members of the house will support. The fact of the matter is that the Vietnamese veterans who currently reside in South Australia and Australia, and other countries outside their former homeland, are intensely proud of what they have done and what they have achieved. They are intensely proud of their service to their former nation during the Vietnam War.

Some members in this place were not around then or were too young to remember the events of the tragic Vietnam War—

The Hon. G.M. Gunn: Or oppose it.

Mr PENGILLY: —or even oppose it—which ended in 1975. I go to events in my capacity as shadow veterans minister, particularly commemorations such as Long Tan Day, ANZAC Day and services at the War Memorial, as does this wonderful group of Vietnamese war veterans. They are a terrific group of people, and I am sure that no member here would dispute that. They paid an immense sacrifice for fighting for the then Republic of South Vietnam. At the end of the war, many of them were put into re-education camps, many were thrown into prison and probably many were executed. They chose to get out of that country and, in the case of these veterans, come to Australia and bring their families with them. Often, they had perilous journeys from South Vietnam in boats and other means of transport.

When you go to these functions, they are one of the happiest groups around. They are intensely proud of what they did but they are intensely proud of now being Australian citizens. They are extremely proud that they can march on our days of remembrance such as ANZAC Day and those other occasions that I have talked about. They are great people to talk to. The Vietnamese community as a whole has made an enormous contribution to Australia since all those people came across the waters, but this group of Vietnamese veterans holds a special place in the memories of what happened during that war that I mentioned so many years ago.

At home on Kangaroo Island, I have substantial volumes of history on the Vietnam War. I lost a friend of mine called Tim Turner in National Service who was killed some three weeks after arriving in South Vietnam when he stepped on a landmine, and I have fond memories of him. He was a couple of years older than me and he got killed on my 19th birthday. Some 50,000-odd Australians went to Vietnam and fought side-by-side with what they called the ARVN forces (the Army of the Republic of Vietnam) and as much as those things—

Mr Koutsantonis interjecting:

Mr PENGILLY: Fighting side by side with the soldiers in what was called the ARVN (the Army of the Republic of Vietnam).

Mr Koutsantonis interjecting:

Mr PENGILLY: No. Unfortunately in many cases, those Vietnamese soldiers were poorly led and they suffered tremendous casualties in battle, particularly after the pull-out by allied forces—America, Australia and other nations. They were left to fend for themselves and perished in great numbers, and it was a tragedy. So it is worthy that we do remember them, and it is most worthy that we acknowledge their presence in Australia today, remembering their fight in those days for the freedom of their country from the communist invasion. Much has been written and much has been said about the Vietnam war (whether it was right or wrong), but it was an event that took place in those days long gone by, and at the time people thought that they were doing the right thing. It is not for us to criticise now. It is only—

Mr Koutsantonis interjecting:

Mr PENGILLY: The member for West Torrens probably cannot remember it. He would have been too young to remember. It was live and it was in our homes. It was the first 'TV war', and I and others were eligible for national service. My marble never came up, but I had many mates who went. Indeed, I lost a mate, and I have great sympathy for those who still struggle on. I have numerous numbers of Australian Vietnam war veterans in my electorate, whom I talk to regularly. I do not treat this matter lightly. I think that, as much as we acknowledge our Australian veterans of that war (and thank heavens they have been acknowledged properly and are being cared for), we should acknowledge the Vietnamese veterans of the former South Vietnamese Army.

I look forward again to renewing acquaintances with some of these members when Long Tan Day comes up in the near future, on 17 August. Further, I look forward to those veterans and their families contributing to Australia for a long time to come. It has been a most interesting process, to see where we have come from with those vast numbers of South-East Asian refugees, who came into Australia from Laos, Vietnam and Cambodia after that conflict finished and even during the time of that conflict, and the way they have assimilated into Australian society.

They are tremendously hardworking, and many of them are of strong Christian faith. The young people have picked up their hard work ethics from their parents, and they have been a credit tribute to the country they came from and are now a proud part of Australian history. With those few words, we seek to recognise and congratulate Vietnamese army veterans who now reside in Australia, and I ask the house to support the motion.

Ms SIMMONS (Morialta) (11:40): I move:

After the words 'Republic of South Vietnam' insert:

and notes that the former federal Liberal government rejected the initial request for funding from the joint Australian/Vietnamese Vietnam War Memorial and notes that the foreign affairs minister of the Liberal government said that no member of the executive would ever visit the memorial if the flags of Australia and the former Republic of Vietnam were flown together.

I rise to support this motion in its amended form. I hope that every South Australian has come to realise the wonderful contribution that Vietnamese South Australians have made and continue to make to our society. I am very lucky to have a large number of Vietnamese constituents in the seat of Morialta.

The first time Vietnamese came to our shores in large numbers was shortly after the fall of Saigon on 30 April 1975. Their presence in our country since that time has enriched us as a nation. There is no doubt that they have brought with them energy, enthusiasm and an earnest desire for a better life. The Vietnamese community are highly regarded as hard workers. They are also enormously respected in the ex-service community, where the camaraderie they share with Australian Vietnam veterans is well known.

I know that this stems from their gratitude to Australia and its soldiers. Long before we, as a nation, realised how shabbily we treated our own Vietnam veterans, our Vietnamese brothers and sisters were showing the way in honouring them. Their gratitude to the Australian Armed Forces has never diminished and remains as strong today as it did when our armed forces fought side by side. How the integration into our society of citizens of the former Republic of Vietnam has progressed over the years is evidenced by the appointment last year of Mr Hieu Van Le as our Lieutenant-Governor. Mr Hieu Van Le is doing a splendid job, and we are proud to call him an Aussie. At the same time, his fellow countrymen are also proud to know he is a fellow Vietnamese, born in Quang Tri.

The Vietnamese know their history. It is a well-documented history that extends over thousands of years. I am pleased that many of the special days remembered by the community of our Vietnamese veterans are being recognised here in Australia. The commemoration of these days is invariably shared with fellow Australians. I was very pleased when I was in Vietnam, with Mr Hieu Van Le and the Attorney-General, two years ago, that I was able to visit Long Tan and to help present a wreath at the memorial there for the soldiers who died in that terrible Long Tan battle, those soldiers having been very well supported by the South Vietnamese Army at that time.

The most historic day of commemoration is, of course, Tran Hung Dao Day, which is commemorated on 16 September each year. Marshal Tran Hung Dao was the Vietnamese Military Grand Commander of Than Long during the Tran dynasty in the late 13^th century. He commanded the Dai Viet armies that repelled three Mongol invasions. These were the first defeats suffered by Kublai Khan and are regarded as among the greatest military feats in world history.

Mr Pengilly interjecting:

Ms SIMMONS: Just shut up and you might learn something. The Mongols invaded from the sea and a tactic employed by Marshal Tran Hung Dao, in the famous Battle of the Bach Dang River, was to position steel-tipped, fire-hardened stakes below the water line. The Mongols were then lured into the river and, when the tide receded, their fleet was holed. More than 400 Mongol vessels were burned and their fleet destroyed.

During my parliamentary tour of Vietnam in 2006, I visited a museum where several of these stakes are preserved some seven centuries later. I was able to touch them, and I wondered at the military genius of this man. In recognition of his generalship, Marshal Tran Hung Dao was adopted as Patron of the Navy of the former Republic of Vietnam. He is remembered every year.

While Tran Hung Dao Day remains a date of great significance, other days are also celebrated. The former Republic of Vietnam Armed Forces Day remembers the day the armed forces of the former republic were forced to take control of their country. Historians among us will recall the coup d'état that deposed the Ngo Dinh Diem regime on 1 November 1963. That regime was followed by short-lived civilian governments. This created political instability. Seeking to capitalise on the situation, the North Vietnamese communists dramatically increased the size of their force in the south. To counter this threat, the armed forces of the former Republic of Vietnam took control of the government on 19 June 1965.

The men and women of the armed forces of the former Republic of Vietnam fought to prevent the invasion from the north. They fought a courageous fight. In the process, they lost over 230,000 people who were killed in action and 300,000 were wounded. These heavy losses were indicative of the tenacity they showed in the defence of their homeland. The armed forces of the former Republic of Vietnam were well-organised with a true sense of honour and integrity.

The third principal day of commemoration observed by our Vietnamese veterans is 30 April. It was a tragic day for Australia—nay, it was a day of tragedy for all peoples who value the rule of law and pluralism. To those born in this country it signifies the end of the Vietnam war, a conflict to which Australia committed 11 years and the lives of more than 500 young Australians. That is a tragedy. To our Vietnamese brothers and sisters it meant so much more. It was the day they lost their country. Take a moment to think about that—losing your country. How does one ever get over that?

At 2.45pm on 30 April 1975 the flag of the former Republic of Vietnam was torn from the flagpole at the presidential palace in Saigon. Sadly, Australia and the former Republic of Vietnam had lost a war. That is something we will never forget, and we thank our Vietnamese veterans for ensuring that the day is burnt into our consciousness. I know that every year on 30 April, a mere five days after our special ANZAC Day, Vietnamese and Australians stand proudly side-by-side at the Vietnam War Memorial and remember this sad event.

I am referring to the splendid war memorial on the Torrens Parade Ground, mostly funded by the Rann Labor government and recognised worldwide as one of the best of its type. It is also the same memorial that the previous federal Liberal government, courtesy of the Hon. Alexander Downer (of repute), initially refused to fund. Can you believe it? At the very time they were sending young Australians into a new conflict in Iraq, the former federal Liberal government was flushing down the memory hole the service and sacrifice of those who fought in our longest war. With this gesture, the Liberal Party suggested that the worth of the work of 50,000 Australians who served in Vietnam had vanished into the mists of time.

This from a Liberal government that was a direct descendant of the government that sent those young men to war. Yes, Madam Deputy Speaker, a Liberal government was happy to honour the flag of the Republic of South Vietnam then—in fact, they ordered young Australians to defend with their lives the cause it represented—but when it suits them they simply turn their backs. Had it been left to the Liberal government, our magnificent Vietnam War Memorial may not have been funded, the flags of Australia and its allies would not have been seen flying side-by-side, and Vietnam veterans would not have this special place to call their own.

I acknowledge that, eventually, kicking and screaming, the Liberal government contributed, but only after it had been shamed into it by the Vietnam veterans, the Adelaide City Council and this government. We would not allow that project to fail and we made a promise to every Vietnam veteran that we would do whatever it took to ensure that their memorial was built. Of course, the Liberal government, per Alexander Downer, was not finished, and mere months before it was constructed he openly stated that, if the memorial went ahead, no member of the federal executive of the government (of which he was a part) would ever visit it while the flags were flying, no matter what the occasion.

Fifty-eight South Australians gave their lives in a cause determined by a Liberal government, and Mr Downer, on behalf of his colleagues, says he will never attend this memorial in their honour if an Australian flag and that of the country we were sent to defend were flown together. This, so the Liberal Party could cosy up to a one-party state, the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, and the party that is that state: the Communist Party of Vietnam.

We on this side wear the friendship badge on our coat lapel: the Australian flag crossed with the flag of the Republic of Vietnam, which is yellow with three horizontal red bars. I saw the former chief of staff to the Liberal foreign minister wearing a different friendship badge: the Australian flag crossed with the communist flag. How far the Liberal Party has drifted from the noble policy of its former Liberal prime minister, Malcolm Fraser, who, having prosecuted the war in Vietnam, accepted the mass of humanity seeking refuge across the South China Sea from the consequences of defeat. Malcolm Fraser defied the racist sneers against these people—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

Ms SIMMONS: —from some of the then political left and brought them to Australia.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Member for Morialta, your time has expired.

The Hon. G.M. GUNN (Stuart) (11:51): We have listened to the member for Morialta, who obviously has a very short memory span. We can recall Jim Cairns standing in the street, putting his arms around the Vietcong. We can remember the moratorium marchers protesting when the government of Australia was in Vietnam defending people whom they now claim to be their friends. We know how the Whitlam government turned its back on those people who worked for the Australian government at the embassy and left them in the hands of the Communists who took over. The government would not allow them or their chauffers to come to Australia when they wanted to.

So do not get up here and shed crocodile tears for the people—examine the facts. The Australian government under Malcolm Fraser—and, prior to that, Harold Holt—went in to protect the people of Vietnam against the aggression of the north, which was organised and promoted from Moscow.

Mr Koutsantonis: And China.

The Hon. G.M. GUNN: And China. Look at some of the recent television programs about how they infiltrated down through the Ho Chi Minh Trail, through Cambodia and Laos, and into Vietnam, and how they turned their back on the agreements they made to end the war. The moment the allied forces left, they tore up every agreement.

We support the welfare of the Vietnam veterans, particularly those from South Vietnam who had to flee for their lives because of their political views. It was not members on this side who marched to support the aggression from the North and to try to get our troops withdrawn. We were there supporting them. What happened? Not only did South Vietnam fall but Laos also went. Look at what happened in Cambodia: the domino effect. It was only good luck that it did not go further.

To move this amendment and make out that members opposite are supporters and friends of the Republic of South Vietnam is gilding the lily. I remember people coming into this place wearing red badges. I remember the moratorium demonstration and confrontation with police that took place on North Terrace and King William Street, and I remember who was there. I think the deputy premier's press secretary, Bruce Muirden was one of the first people arrested. I remember all these characters who were apologists. Now, because they think there is some political advantage in it, they have become best friends.

I do not know who wrote the speech for the member for Morialta, but I think she should get a new speechwriter. She should stick to the facts of the matter. Some of us lost friends, and one of my neighbours was killed in South Vietnam. I say to the honourable member: if you are going to get up and tell a story, tell the whole story and not half the story because then you will have some credibility and prove that you are genuine and not here trying to make a short-term political gain by telling half a story.

I think the people who fled South Vietnam have made a good contribution to this community. They are hard workers and understand what it is like to live under the socialist yoke. They have suffered dearly, and a lot of them have lost generations of assets. They risked their lives to come here. We appreciate their contribution, but clearly understand why they came here (the honourable member has not gone into why they came here): they were let down.

Some of those in government were less than honourable and were corrupt. The marines fought brilliantly until they ran out of ammunition and were not resupplied. They were flying helicopters onto aircraft carriers that were getting pushed over into the sea. For a considerable amount of my time I represented Woomera, as the member for Giles does now, and I got to know a number of Americans at Nurrungar. I spoke to some of the senior people who had been in Vietnam, and one brigadier told me that this collapse would have taken place earlier.

He said that only 5,500 of them were left, but they were determined to fight it out to the finish. They started to fight, and Nixon gave the order to send in the Air Force. Within a few hours, it had destroyed the Vietcong coming down the road. If Kissinger had let them do it again, they would have stopped them again. They could have stopped them again but, because the apologists in the state department got control—

Mr Koutsantonis: If Hubert Humphrey had won the 1968 election, Vietnam would not have fallen. Conservatives cannot win wars.

The Hon. G.M. GUNN: That is not right.

Mr Koutsantonis: FDR, Harry Truman, Lyndon Johnson.

The Hon. G.M. GUNN: He is getting enthusiastic. I will give a little more history. If it had not been for a Republican administration, the British would not have been a success in the Falklands without the support given, so just remember that. I can tell you that that has come from the very highest level of the British government.

In conclusion, I repeat that it is a great pity that we have heard a one-sided story and that the real facts have not been given. It is a political exercise. Those of us on this side have always supported the government of South Vietnam, and that is why there was involvement by the Liberal government to defend these people's right to democracy and freedom. I think that it is a pity that we heard a one-sided story.

Mr KOUTSANTONIS (West Torrens) (11:58): Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.

Mr Goldsworthy: We're going to get a lesson.

Mr KOUTSANTONIS: Here begineth the lesson. First, no-one in this house has said that the actions of the Whitlam government in not allowing refugees (including the chauffeurs who were famously left behind when Australia pulled out and the South fell) refugee status was not an appalling crime. No-one disputes that, and no-one disputes that the Labor Party actively opposed Australia's involvement in Vietnam, and it was punished at many elections because of its opposition to the war.

No-one disputes that Vietnam veterans were not honoured appropriately on their return from their tour of duty; hopefully, that wrong has been righted. No-one disputes that Australians fought valiantly alongside South Vietnamese patriots defending their country against the communist scourge. No-one disputes that. No-one disputes that, 30 years on, the Australian government is attempting to normalise relations with the communist regime in Vietnam. Fine. That does not mean we should forget our history, and it does not mean that we should normalise those relationships at the expense of those who fought and died. I know that members opposite were embarrassed by the Hon. Alexander Downer's treatment of those South Vietnamese.

Mr Goldsworthy: Rubbish.

Mr KOUTSANTONIS: The member for Kavel says 'rubbish'. The truth is this: the federal government did not want the South Vietnamese flag flown at that memorial. Why? Because it is trying to normalise relationships with the Vietnamese Communist regime in much the same way as it will not let the Republic of China fly its flag at memorials. Those members who understand the difference between the People's Republic of China and the Republic of China will know what I am talking about.

The member for Morialta is absolutely right. She is in no way rewriting history about the Liberal Party's support for the war in Vietnam and our opposition to that war. We are simply talking about the recognition of those who fought and died in that war defending democracy.

If the member for Stuart honestly believes that Alexander Downer was right to say that no member of the Howard government would attend that memorial, I do not believe him, because I know in my heart of hearts that he thinks they should have turned up. I know in my heart of hearts that almost every member opposite was embarrassed by Alexander Downer and his foreign policy on the People's Republic of Vietnam. I think that the Labor Party did the right thing, and the Premier showed leadership and courage in pushing ahead. We have to remember the battles that have been fought and won and the battles that have been fought and lost.

Imagine an Australian prime minister saying, 'We can't commemorate the loss at Gallipoli, because it might offend our relationship with Turkey.' Imagine the Prime Minister saying that. There would be outrage and rioting in the streets, probably led by the Hon. Graham Gunn who probably served and fought as a young man at Gallipoli.

The idea that we cannot fly the South Vietnamese flag at a memorial near North Terrace because it might offend some Communist diplomat is rubbish. I cannot believe that the member for Stuart is defending some Mandarin—some public servant from a Communist regime—for being offended by the flying of the flag. He should know better. I will never doubt the member for Stuart's patriotism to this country. I would never doubt his patriotism and his love and affection for those veterans who have served and defended this country, and our allies—never, but do not question ours. The Labor Party is just as patriotic and supportive. You do not see us getting up in this place and condemning Robert Menzies for selling pig iron to the Japs while they were bombing Darwin.

If you want to bring up history, we can talk about all sorts of things that went on from both sides. But we are talking about 30 years on, honouring those who served side-by-side with Australian troops. Yes, they were on the losing side. Yes, there was a new government in place in that country. Yes, they have a new flag and, yes, they have a new system of government, but that does not mean we cannot fly their flag. I proudly fly the Republic of China flag in my office. I proudly support Taiwan.

The Hon. G.M. Gunn: I've been there.

Mr KOUTSANTONIS: So have I. I proudly support them, because I believe in supporting democracies against Communist oppression—I always have and I always will. But I cannot believe that a lion, a patriot, the great Conservative—the Hon. Graham Gunn—defended cowards like Alexander Downer who, the moment he got a telex from some junior representative of the Vietnamese government saying, 'Don't fly this flag,' actually tells every member of the Howard executive not to turn up. And the member for Stuart defends it! I cannot believe it.

One of the great aspects of the Liberal Party—it claims—is its independence, despite what the party room says. 'We can vote whatever we like; we're proud Liberals. We can have dissenting voices'—unless you are Peter Lewis. 'We can have dissenting views'—unless you are Alexander Downer, then you have to toe the line. The Liberal Party realised the backlash in rural communities, where these proud refugees have made themselves great citizens of this proud nation by working hard to assimilate and bring their traditions to our country to enrich our nation, and how offended they were at the Liberal Party's stance at that memorial.

Just next door to my office is a service station. That service station is run by a local Vietnamese family who served in the South Vietnamese Army. He was at that memorial. Every day he proudly wears a pin on his lapel with the Vietnamese flag—the yellow flag with the three red bars. But Alexander Downer, John Howard, Peter Costello and Brendan Nelson all thought that flag should never be flown again. What a disgrace!

I do not doubt what the member for Stuart said in his speech, but do not try to tell me that Alexander Downer did not try to boycott every Liberal from turning up to that memorial.

The Hon. G.M. Gunn: Jim Cairns—

Mr KOUTSANTONIS: I do not care about Jim Cairns. We are talking about the former federal government that, up to November last year, did not want that flag flown. What a disgrace! Apologists. Every Vietnam veteran who turned up to that memorial said that the Premier spoke with such eloquence that it brought tears to their eyes.

Members of the Vietnamese community have welcomed the appointment of one of the most famous refugees from that imprisoned country as our Lieutenant-Governor. So, do not sit here and lecture us about patriotism, about abandonment and about not looking after refugees. We are ready to get up and say sorry for our past actions. All this motion is doing is asking that members opposite do the same thing, because the offence they caused those veterans and members of the Vietnamese community still runs deep. If you do not believe me, talk to their community leaders, if you ever have time to go out and meet any of them. See what they think of the Liberal Party now. In one fell swoop that genius Alexander Downer offended one of the largest migrant groups in Australia, and he stands condemned for it.

The member for Morialta is right to move this motion. She is right to talk about historical truths. She is right to talk about the offence caused to those communities, and members opposite should be ashamed of themselves for trying to howl her down for defending Vietnamese veterans from flying the flag they fought under. The arguments the member for Stuart made for not changing that flag with the Union Jack in the corner was that Australian troops fought under that flag, yet he then turns around and says that you cannot fly the South Vietnamese under which those same veterans fought.

I cannot believe it. I am outraged, shocked, horrified at this. Anyway, I support the amendment and hope members opposite come to their senses and do so as well.

Amendment carried; motion as amended carried.