Does NZ need the RSA?

Print

Sun, 24 Apr 2011 6:26p.m.

By Emma Jolliff

It's Anzac Day tomorrow, and for 95 years returned servicemen have been supported by the Returned and Services Association.

But as the number of original veterans diminishes, how relevant is the RSA as an organisation, and how enduring is it likely to be?

It was a year after the allies' failed landing at Gallipoli that the country's first RSA was founded in Wellington, then called the New Zealand Returned Soldiers' Association, the RSA became the guardians of Anzac Day.

The RSA's aim is to support veterans and advocate on their behalf.

“Each year another 1000 are being created, from our deployment of defence in places like Afghanistan, Timor, the Solomons,” says the RSA’s Stephen Clarke.

But that's way down on the number of veterans from the world wars of early last century.

In 1950 there were 225,000 veterans living in New Zealand, there are currently only 40,000. But the membership is exactly the same - 115,000.

That's because these days "associates" with no military service are allowed to join. They make up more than half the members.

In the early days, the RSA was often the only place where veterans felt they could talk openly about the trauma of war with others who'd been there.

“People in here are the last ones who'd like to see NZ troops going to war. They've seen it happen, they don't particularly want to see it happen again,” says Don McGrury.

Those we spoke to say the RSA creates a strong link between past servicemen and current service.

“We're coming up to our own centenary in 2016, coming up to the centenaries of the first world war, of Gallipoli. That's going to be a huge time for New Zealanders to reflect on our history,” says Mr Clarke.

“The Anzac spirit is alive and well and the RSA is a big part of that. I can't see that diminishing,” says Lieutenant Commander Brendon Oakley.

So while New Zealand may not be involved in as much frontline combat as in the past, the sacrifices of all those who have fought for New Zealand won't be forgotten.

3 News

Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

26 Apr 2011 08:25a.m.

ian wrote:

The RSA was created originally by retuned service men and women, as an exclusive club for their benefit.
Who and what happens to it in the future, must remain the sole realm of those members.
To those that interfere,and try to influence,or express acidic opinions, i say "butt out"--mind your own business.
The RSA will when it wishes, decide the all future moves.

24 Apr 2011 10:53p.m.

Brent Mckeown wrote:

Yes we definitly do .If it was not for my dad and those that served i and my children and grandchildren may have had to also go to war!!!

24 Apr 2011 09:48p.m.

Whatever... wrote:

No we don't need the RSA. Speaking from experience the treatment of ex non-combat servicemen is a joke. We all played a part even if we didn't go to war (through no choice of our own - there was no war when I was an active member of the RNZA). Nowadays I don't believe the RSA cares about ex-servicemen; instead it is lip service and the true motive is money. The local RSA is more interested in selling memberships. Frankly I'd rather have a beer at home and couldn't care less if the RSA no longer existed.

24 Apr 2011 08:24p.m.

M M wrote:

Well, as it says above, we still have veterans. Those who aren't vets but are in the RSA are the ones paying the higher subs and therefore funding the venture.