Australian Labor defence minister lobbied to keep ban on gay defence personnel
 |
| Personnel from the Army's 16th Air Defence Regiment with one of the unit's RBS 70 systems (Photo credit: Wikipedia) |
Robert Ray’s defence of ban on homosexuals in
military at odds with PM’s department, cabinet papers reveal
In 1992 Australia’s defence
minister Robert Ray argued that a ban on gay defence force members should
remain because homosexual behaviour destroyed the intimate group bonding of
heterosexuals and violated their privacy.
In cabinet documents released by
the National Archives, Ray emerges as a staunch defender of the ban on
homosexuals in the military against the Department of the Prime Minister and
Cabinet and the Attorney General’s Department.
So fierce was the split in
cabinet, Ray wrote his own submission to dissent from other departments on the
issue. “Bonding and teamwork are the key to survival and success in combat,” he
wrote, arguing to defer any policy change until a survey of the Australian
defence force was
completed.
“Homosexual behaviour or
tendencies destroy the intimate bonding of the group because of the fear that
the physical and psychological elements of military cohesion may be
misrepresented and mistrusted as sexual in nature and therefore intrusive and
threatening.”
Ray said shared accommodation for
defence personnel meant normal levels of privacy were not available.
Robert Ray in 2002. In 1992, the then defence minister argued that
allowing homosexuals to serve in the defence forces would ‘violate the right of
heterosexuals of both genders to a minimum level of privacy’.
“It must therefore be assumed that
where communal living, toilet and bathing facilities are provided, that no one
using those facilities is homosexual,” he wrote. “Admission of known
homosexuals into an all-male or female group would violate the right of
heterosexuals of both genders to a minimum level of privacy.”
Ray rejected the argument by those
wanting to end the ban that Australian and international law ruled out
discrimination. He said the law allowed for discrimination on the “inherent
requirements of the job”.
He warned that, as the enlistment
age was 15, the ADF was responsible for the moral welfare of younger members
and therefore was responsible for “protection from homosexual abuse”.
Other operating defence partners,
such as Singapore, viewed “homosexuality as a serious military and civil
offence”, which meant ADF members could not be posted for exchange or training.
