Who is against posthumously awarding the commendation?

Whoever is behind the mystery poll, asking for public opinion on Ordinary Seaman Teddy Sheean’s posthumous VC bid, is also asking another question – who is against commending this war hero, writes Jenna Cairney.

THE Federal Liberal Party has denied knowledge of a robocall poll asking Tasmanians whether Ordinary Seaman Teddy Sheean should be posthumously awarded the Victoria Cross.

Of course, we must take them at their word.

However, the denial does leave us with the very curious mystery of who exactly wanted to gauge popular opinion on the issue.

Regardless, supporters of the war hero have a clear position on the issue and it is not one which is wholly and solely motivated by popular opinion – although if someone has data from a mystery poll saying people were somehow against this, we’d love to see it.

MYSTERY OVER ROBO-CALL THAT ASKS ABOUT TEDDY SHEEAN

Rather, Teddy’s supporters have been motivated by the way the facts so strongly indicate a massive injustice has been perpetrated against a deceased veteran and by proxy his family.

Let’s set this out in full.

Almost 80 years after his death a massive community campaign continued to call for Sheean to be awarded our highest honour.

Veterans Affairs Minister Guy Barnett with Raymond Leonard, the last remaining survivor from the HMAS Armidale.

As a result, the Defence Honours and Awards Appeals Tribunal was asked to review the issue.

The Tribunal was told there were two criteria under which the VC could be awarded.

Number one: that a procedural injustice had occurred or, number two: that new evidence came to light in the course of the review.

The Tribunal found there was new evidence which had not been considered by the military decision makers in the wake of Sheean’s death.

It found the fact he had reached a lifeboat before swimming back to the sinking HMAS Armidale had not been put before those considering what honours his actions deserved

Obviously, this is new and profound evidence which dramatically changes the complexion of his actions.

Had Sheean simply been aboard the sinking vessel and decided to man a gun – in circumstances where his life had already been lost – the heroism of what occurred would be dramatically diminished.

Ordinary Seaman Teddy Sheean.

However, the facts now show this is not what occurred. They also indicate that Sheean was not a gunner, but a loader and that we shot down at least one aircraft.

They even say he kept firing after the ship went under.

His was the ultimate sacrifice, he gave his life to improve the chances his mates would survive.

After a review clearly set out the facts above the decision went back to the Federal Government.

At this point in time the Chief of the Australian Defence Force, General Angus Campbell, intervened in the case.

General Campbell wrote to the Prime Minister saying to award the VC to Sheean may open the floodgates to other aggrieved war heroes and their families to seek reviews of their honours.

Studio portrait of the Sheean brothers of Lower Barrington, Tasmania, both Australian sailors serving on HMAS Derwent.

He also said the act may upset the Queen.

The Federal Defence Minister, Senator Linda Reynolds would later tell parliament the Tribunal: “did not present any new evidence that might support reconsideration of the valour inquiries recommendation.”

MORE NEWS:

• Border battleground as opening date remains mystery
• Free trade talks with UK bring golden opportunity
• Tassie icon set for facelift to restore heritage

That statement led the head of the Tribunal Mark Sullivan AO to accuse Senator Reynolds of misleading parliament.

Now, we are told a new review into the issue will give the PM some guidance.

We also have a mystery poll trying to ascertain whether most Tasmanians are behind Sheean being posthumously awarded the VC.

All we would ask is that the facts as they stand are given their proper treatment.

Then the answer is obvious, it is time to award Sheean the VC.