How we remember war affects us all. Council selection should reflect that

The responsible minister, Matt Keogh, put out a media release in the dying minutes of summer and The Canberra Times reported it.

The key points were that there will be a call for expressions of interest for new members of the memorial council and that applicants will be assessed for their knowledge and experience and in relation to the balance of skills across the council.

In the interim, the government will extend until June 30 the appointments of five term-expired members.

The potential for a bulk change of council members had been obvious: five vacancies between the beginning of February and Anzac Day was an opportunity to fundamentally change the balance of the council, replacing some Coalition-connected or long-serving members, and the RSL national president, with some new faces. The method for filling the vacancies - in one hit and after public advertising - was not anticipated.

What cannot change (without amending the memorial's legislation) is the role of the governor-general, on advice from the minister, in appointing council members.

The minister will have to sift through the expressions of interest and decide who to recommend to Yarralumla.

The significance of filling the five vacancies in this way is obvious, too: is the council to be a stumbling block or a facilitator to the proper recognition and commemoration of the Frontier Wars in the memorial?

The Canberra Times's article was headed "Govt opens way to greater Frontier Wars recognition at War Memorial".

Although the current council seems to be divided on the Frontier Wars, there is little point in speculating about the minister's motivations. We should instead commend the minister and council chair Kim Beazley for this initiative.

Public input into the controlling body of the memorial has historical resonance. Positions in the mass armies, air forces and navies of the past were filled by recruitment drives boosted by patriotic advertising.

It is appropriate, therefore, that positions on the war memorial council, the body which determines how these men and women are remembered, should also be filled by advertising and application.

The members appointed through this new process might have a background in, for example, ethnic and First Nations bodies, Legacy, the Medical Association for the Prevention of War, the Red Cross, the RSL, and Soldier On.

They could be historians, archivists, or experts in museum management. Or they could just be ordinary Australians.

It would be appropriate for the minister to take the advice of the chair of the memorial council and perhaps the director of the memorial before putting the names to the governor-general. Some ex officio military positions might be retained (though they might not be filled as at present by the three service chiefs). Again, legislative change would be needed here.

There might in future even be some elected positions. An institution which claims to tell its nation's story should surely be open to having some council members democratically elected by, from and for the nation.

Australians enlisted for our major wars in great numbers. Some of them became officers. A handful of them became senior officers.

Decades on, too much of the control of our national war memorial has devolved to the senior officer cadre and a supporting cast of the great and the good, particularly those with links to the conservative side of politics. The people should take back this role.

The remembrance of war - and, more importantly, the prospect of peace - are too important to be left to those who have made a profession out of military activity or a hobby out of military history.

READ MORE:

These matters affect all of us and our future, not just those who try to keep the Anzac flame burning in pretty much the same way as it has for the last century.

The war memorial council as now composed is an anachronism. It stands in the way of significant change in how we commemorate war, especially the Frontier Wars, and hope for a peaceful future.

A council more representative of Australian experience of war, including the Frontier Wars - and of Australians - would help the Memorial tell a story not just of daring and death in uniform but of the widespread and lasting effects of war on individuals, families (including First Nations families) and communities.

A story not just of what Australians have done in war but of what war has done to Australia and Australians, including First Australians, and what it should never do again. That would be good.