Veterans demand Angus Campbell apologise, tell Senate medals overhaul vital to fix flailing military morale

The defence honours and awards system must be significantly overhauled to stamp out abuse, avoid “Campbell coward punches” and improve flailing morale in the military, a senate inquiry has been told.

Veterans and advocates said the “broken two-tier” medals system has allowed senior officers with no battlefield experience to be awarded prestigious honours “by their mates” and to “pad out their resume”, while front-line soldiers were either not acknowledged or were forced through arduous processes to be recognised for their service.

Others lashed former defence chief Angus Campbell as a “traitor” to his country over his decision to strip the Meritorious Unit Citation from up to 3000 Afghanistan veterans over alleged war crimes, and demanded he apologise for smearing their reputation.

While the decision was ultimately overturned by the previous Government, anger within the community flared again last September when Defence Minister Richard Marles closed the response to the Brereton Inquiry by writing to up to nine commanders, advising them their distinguished service awards would be revoked.

Veteran Scott Seccombe told the inquiry Mr Campbell was a “traitor”.

“Angus Campbell is a traitor to his country and he should be dismissed,” he told the Senate.

“The way he has treated those 3000 soldiers ... (and those commanders) is absolutely traitorous.”

Dan Fortune, a recipient of the Distinguished Service Cross and Bar, demanded an apology for the “disgraceful smearing” of the MUC, asking for “restorative justice for those pejoratively impacted by that denigration”.

“This is not about disaffected veterans having a crack. We want a future purpose-fit system that people can believe in,” he said.

He called on the Senators to heed the opportunity they had been presented to fix the “corrupted and abused” recognition system.

“Fix the system, please. We don’t want any more Campbell coward punches. We were coward punched by Campbell, please don’t let that happen to the next generation,” he said.

Veterans are also vexed that General Campbell – who has recently been appointed the Ambassador to Belgium and NATO – was awarded a Distinguished Service Cross despite never being “in action” in Afghanistan, and has been allowed to keep his honour despite being the Middle East commander during the alleged war crimes.

But they say that is just the tip of the iceberg, and that for decades senior officers had been rewarded for medals as part of a “salary package”, which had diminished the sanctity of the honours and awards system.

Matthew Brennan, who served for 30 years, including tours in Afghanistan, said the system should “always be merit based”, but the foundations were “broken in Afghanistan”.

“Soldiers bled and died unrecognised on the battlefield, while senior officers self-awarded remote from the battlefield,” he said.

“Only about 60 per cent of the nominations for special operations task-group eight and nine were awarded, and about half were downgraded. This is unacceptable.”

He said the systemic abuse of the system by the highest-ranking officers had “damaged mental health and driven moral injury”.

“Outstanding soldiers ask ‘were we worthy? Was it worth the sacrifice? Did our chain of command trust us?’” he said.

“The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena”.

Renee Wilson from the Families of Veterans Guild said there was a “self-perpetuating cycle” of officers awarding other officers honours for doing “what they are paid to do” at the expense of others.

Andrew White, an Afghanistan veteran, said the existing system “disproportionately favoured senior ranks who are often rewarded simply for fulfilling their roles”.

“The system has continued to be abused, enabling officers removed from the fight to nominate, recommend, approve and wear Australia’s highest leadership award despite many knowing they fail to meet the qualifying criteria,” he said.

“This practice undermines the integrity of the honours and award system, which must be reformed and made independent to ensure fairness, transparency and recognition based on merit.”

Andrew MacNaughton from the Australian Special Forces Association said the “gaming of the system by a select few” had had catastrophic impacts.

“This all comes back done to that overarching issue of retention, recruitment, and capability,” he said.

“We’ve lost skill sets because morale is non-existent in defence.”

Senator Malcolm Roberts, who referred the inquiry, said the hearing had made clear there was a “two-tier system”.

“The only recognition some soldiers have of their sacrifice and service is a medal. When the system that administers medals is broken, that destroys morale and is a direct contributor to the military recruitment and retention crisis,” he told The Nightly.

“It’s clear that the Defence hierarchy cannot be trusted to be impartial and objective when it comes to giving our personnel the recognition they deserve.”

Deputy Chief of ADF Personnel Rear Admiral Richard Boulton said the testimonies “demonstrate the complexity” of the issue.

“It shows how different people perceive awards in different ways. It highlights the best of our character, and it challenges to think about who we are as an organisation and who we’re recognising,” he said.

Defence also sought to clarify the DSC as a senior leadership award, and not one for gallantry in action, a distinction they have not made clear enough to serving ADF.

Witnesses suggested various ways to reform the system, including distancing it further from defence.

“We would like a future-fit purpose, design, values-centric, assurance mechanisms. We want to abolish the current tribunal. It’s clearly failed. We want to get something that’s fit for purpose so that, going forward, these ideals can be protected,” Mr Fortune said.

“Any review should deliver a system that is fit-for-purpose.”

Mr Brennan called for an “objective review” of all honours and awards nominations of Special Operations Task Group to ensure credit was going to “the men actually in the arena”.

Mr White said the system “must be reformed and made independent to ensure fairness, transparency and recognition based on merit”.

The Australian Special Forces Association called for the Defence Honours and Awards Appeals Tribunal – which currently provides an avenue for veterans to seek review of eligibility for an honour – be given greater responsibility, and consider and approve all medal and award nominations.

They also asked the senate to recommend DHAAT conduct an inquiry into the awarding of all distinguished service awards.

DHAAT chair Stephen Skehill said the various submissions put to the senate were “thought provoking”.

The inquiry is due to report by February 28.