Bruce Billson (Dunkley, Liberal Party, Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence) Share this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Oxley for his second question. I am more than happy to talk about this subject. My point is, no, I will not join the Labor Party in their cobbled together, hastily put together, media stunt on the eve of the budget. I made those points quite clearly. What we have seen right throughout my time as minister, and ministers beforehand, is that the Labor Party do not come forward with the hard work. They do not put in the effort to get policy proposals right. As was just mentioned regarding the ASIST program, a simple Labor sticker has been stuck on top of a memo that I also received via email. I have emphasised—and perhaps the member for Oxley overlooked the point—that our support for the ASIST program is part of a comprehensive strategy.

There is no single solution to self-harm. Veterans, serving men and women of the Defence Force and the broader veterans community all live full lives. There are other influences on their wellness and emotional wellbeing, and that is why a comprehensive strategy is required, not simply putting more money into a program that is currently unconstrained by the budget that supports it—that is, more people want to participate. We have more resources to accommodate that. The simple reality is that in the last financial year there were 56 people. With the support of the Department of Veterans’ Affairs and the major ex-service communities promoting the program, it would be simply naive, superficial and lazy to suggest that that is all that is needed to tackle the mental health issues of the veterans community.

I go to the second question that was asked of me. In terms of the indexation of payments that are made to the veterans community, the indexation principles are very sound. They are entirely defensible. They recognise the special place of our veterans community and take account of the basis upon which the payment is made. The cobbled together, hastily put together, announcement that Labor made was the same announcement that the shadow minister, at the Queensland RSL congress, fessed up about when he said that smarter minds than his had put this idea together. It emphasised his lack of understanding about the program. He was quite open about his own confusion.

Labor are actually proposing a method of indexation that is not used for any other payment within the Commonwealth. He and the Labor Party have confused the methods that are used for service pensions, where payments are adjusted against either a benchmark of 25 per cent of male total average weekly earnings or movements in CPI. What that says is that if the CPI movements over time do not maintain that 25 per cent benchmark then the adjustment is made back to the benchmark. The Labor Party, not understanding this, have said they will have an indexation method—a cobbled together, either/or, whichever is greater, method—that does not exist anywhere in the Commonwealth system. It again emphasises the lack of work that the Labor Party constantly display in just badging someone else’s idea, and then, when it is highlighted to be unprincipled, unsustainable and unsubstantiated, they say, ‘Brighter minds than mine came up with this idea.’

I am highlighting—and the member for Oxley may be very interested to know this—that 100,000 veterans receive injury compensation payments and, in fact, may have exactly the same condition as the people that the announcement of the Labor Party was focusing on, and they will potentially have exactly the same condition indexed differently for no other reason than it is a political stunt of the Labor Party. What you saw in the budget is real money payable now, not some promise on the never-never, not some idea that the Labor Party have brought forward, where they will come up with some entirely new method of indexation and think about implementing it in late 2008 that may produce a benefit in 2012.

You see local members of parliament running around saying, ‘Labor promises to increase benefits.’ That is not accurate. It is unprincipled. It does not reflect the quality of the work that the coalition puts in place and it also does not address the simple fact that, when you are putting in place a repatriation system that recognises the special status and the particular needs of our veterans community, you do not junk those principles. The last time I stood in this place the member for Banks said, ‘Why are veterans different from pensioners?’ They are very different from pensioners. We need to understand why that is the case and not junk the principles that have seen our system develop and evolve over many years and many governments. That is why I made those remarks.

If the member for Oxley and particularly the shadow minister who has fessed up to his ignorance about them wants to have this explained to them again, I am more than happy to do that, because their vandalism of the veterans’ affairs system will stand as one of the great negative contributions Labor has made to veterans’ affairs. At least up until recently they just did not care; now they just do not bother doing the work and they are indifferent to the consequences of that recklessness.

See this speech in context