Madeleine King (Brand, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Before I speak on the Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Omnibus) Bill 2017, I would like to briefly associate myself with and support the comments of the Minister for Veterans' Affairs and those of the shadow minister for veterans' affairs, the member for Kingston, earlier this week in relation to the government's response to the recent Senate committee report on the inquiry into suicide by veterans and ex-service personnel, The constant battle: suicide by veterans.

It's a good thing that the government has accepted all the recommendations of the report, and Labor looks forward to continuing discussions with the government on the implementation of the recommendations. As someone who has a significant defence community—hosting, as Rockingham does, the largest naval base in Australia—veterans' concerns are of particular importance to me, and I welcome this action to address the tragic issue of suicide among the ex-service personnel and veteran community.

I'd also like to take this opportunity to congratulate the member for Kingston on her elevation to the Labor shadow cabinet. The member for Kingston and her office have been invaluable to me as an incoming member of parliament in the seat of Brand by assisting my office in the many and varied questions and issues that are raised by veterans and ex-service personnel and their families that live in my community. So I'd like to congratulate and thank the member for Kingston.

I'd like to speak in support of the Veterans’ Affairs Legislation Amendment (Omnibus) Bill 2017 and its amendments, that look to improve the operation of veterans' affairs legislation. The implementation of amendments that will clarify, improve or streamline the operation of the law as it applies to veterans' affairs and processes within the Department of Veterans' Affairs is a good move. My electorate of Brand, as I've said, is home to the Royal Australian Navy's largest base, HMAS Stirling, located just off the coast of Rockingham. Commissioned in 1978, HMAS Stirling now hosts 12 fleet units, including the RAN's Anzac class frigates, with Collins class submarines also stationed here. HMAS Stirling is home to more than 2,300 service personnel. HMAS Stirling and Garden Island, on which the base is, have changed a great deal since I was a young girl growing up just around the corner in Shoalwater Bay.

With many past and present servicewomen and men making the communities across Brand their permanent homes, this bill has the potential to improve the lives of many people in my electorate. This bill was referred to the Senate Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade for consideration and, given the number of schedules and the potential impact they will have on how veterans engage with the department, this referral was supported by Labor. We on this side supported this referral so that the legislation could be thoroughly examined and so that proposed changes would not leave veterans any worse off once enacted. I'm happy to support those proposed changes that will benefit the former servicewomen and men and their families who live in my electorate, and, of course, those across the country.

I'd like to turn to the amendments and what they'll mean for people affected. This bill deals with a number of different elements within the Veterans' Affairs legislation in its eight schedules. Schedule 1 amendments look to align the provisions of the Veterans' Entitlements Act under which the Veterans' Review Board operates and those similar provisions of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. This work to align these similar provisions will modernise the board's operation by ensuring the board provides a mechanism of review that is accessible, fair, economical, informal and quick; proportionate to the importance and nature of the matter; and promotes trust and confidence in the board's decision-making. The Veterans' Review Board provides independent merits reviews of decisions about pensions and allowances under the Veterans' Entitlements Act. This includes disability pensions, as well as rehabilitation, compensation and other benefits under the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act.

Appearing before the board when dealing with matters relating to pension decisions, compensation issues and rehab issues can be a highly emotional and daunting experience for many veterans. The RSL, in its submission to the Senate Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade, made the point of stating that many veterans who lodge a claim:

… are often dealing with emotions associated with the loss of their military career, their inability or reduced ability to provide for their family, difficulty in obtaining employment post-service if they are injured or ill and strained relationships with family

Appearing before the board is not an easy or straightforward action for many. This should be recognised as we consider this bill.

Schedule 1 amendments also impose an ongoing obligation on both the claimant and on the Department of Veterans' Affairs during the period until the board has determined the matter, to lodge with the board a copy of any document that is in their possession relevant to the review that has not been lodged previously. The amendments provide the board with the power to vary or revoke a decision made under the alternative dispute resolution process, with the consent of the parties and where the board is satisfied that it is within its powers and otherwise appropriate to do so. It also requires the Repatriation Commission or any person representing the commission in a review to use their best endeavours to assist the board in fulfilling their legislated objectives. These are all positive measures.

However, it was proposed that section 6 of schedule 1 would give the Principal Member of the Veterans' Review Board the ability to dismiss an application for review should they be satisfied that the application, among other things, is misconceived, has no reasonable prospect of success or is otherwise an abuse of process. Stakeholders raised concern about this with the committee, and we on this side had concerns about this provision. The Veterans' Review Board is a less adversarial process than the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. Veterans are not represented by lawyers before the board. Appearing before the board gives veterans a chance to have their say. It is their chance to be heard when otherwise they might not be. By taking this chance away from veterans, the government would fundamentally change how veterans engage with the board and how veterans perceive the board. I've been told by a senior advocate who appears before the Veterans' Review Board that most associations who represent veterans at the board would not support this change. People who work in this area, the volunteers who work to assist vets and their families were very concerned that, while a principal member is usually quite reasonable, there was a risk in introducing this change. There was a risk that a person could wrongly interpret documentation, leading to a veteran missing out on their right of review. For these reasons, advocates supported the process that is currently in place, as it is one where further advice can be sought and, in the process, can be used to further review a decision of the board.

The proposed change to section 6 of schedule 1 had the potential to deny veterans the opportunity to be heard. We have heard, again through the committee process, that the principal member would have been presented with the circumstances to use this power to dismiss an application for review only three times in the last seven years. Time and experience have shown that the process of review by veterans to the board is not one being misused by veterans, and legislating against veterans having an opportunity to be heard is not an action that I would support. There seems to be little point in doing so. It seems this section would deliver very little while, at the same time, causing unnecessary upset and anxiety in the ex-service personnel community. The Kwinana, Rockingham and Port Kennedy RSL sub-branches in my electorate of Brand would also prefer this section be removed from this bill. We understand that the government, following the Labor opposition's urging, is now moving an amendment to remove this section. We welcome this change, as no doubt will advocates as well, as it recognises the unique nature of the Veterans' Review Board. I am very pleased to see the removal of this section.

Amendments in schedule 2, however, will work to benefit veterans by simplifying and streamlining processes. The current time it takes to appoint staff to the Specialist Medical Review Council—three months or longer—will be addressed. The long delay can affect the council's ability to do its very important job. The council's an independent body where vets who have issues with the decisions of the Repatriation Medical Authority regarding the content of a statement of principles can go for review. The statement of principles' content is in respect of the particular kind of injury or disease or death suffered by the veteran, and this amendment will assist in more timely decisions being made for veterans—and that is a good thing.

Other streamlining measures will enable the Specialist Medical Review Council to adopt electronic lodgement of requests for reviews. That means a hard copy will no longer be required, and so requests for review will not have to be lodged at a Department of Veterans' Affairs office. This measure is broadly supported. Mind you, in particular parts of my electorate, we do have a lot of difficulty getting internet coverage, and the NBN's a long way away, so some veterans living in communities in Baldivis will still have to go to the Department of Veterans' Affairs office because the infrastructure is not in place for them to be able to use this modern provision of electronic lodgement.

In regard to the electronic lodgement provision, the community has commented it should not be used to the detriment of veterans when submitting claims, appeals or reconsiderations. No doubt, for those who can undertake electronic lodgement, it'll be beneficial for those people in a single-claim situation, but there may be complications if a complex issue is involved. I understand such complications can arise around understanding statements of principles and with the different standards of proof required in different situations. It is important that people who choose to use, or are able to use, this new electronic lodgement method do so knowing they can still seek advice from an advocate should they need it; but, for those who do not require additional support and advice, this amendment in introducing a new, more efficient electronic lodgement of request for review does have the potential to benefit veterans who are, indeed, able to access the internet at all.

Other amendments in this bill will allow for the provision of financial assistance to people attending a Specialist Medical Review Council hearing to make an oral submission. This measure will see individuals, as well as representatives of organisations and any necessary attendants accompanying them, being able to receive financial assistance to attend a hearing to make an oral submission. We've received positive feedback on this measure. I've been told it will ensure a better process as it ensures the hearing is as informed as possible of the reasons for the applicant pursuing the review. I'm told there is a chance that the panel might not have all the relevant information before them when making their decision. I'm also told that hard copies of complex claims are not circulated in their entirety and that documents, once lodged, have, sadly, become lost or misplaced. Making it financially possible for a veteran or their representative to attend a hearing and make such an oral submission will help alleviate the stress when these things happen, and this is a positive step.

Another good step in the bill is a measure that would give the minister the power to make arrangements with foreign governments to cover the provision of benefits and the payment of benefits. With this bill, in schedule 3, the minister can enter into agreements in relation to reciprocal arrangements with Veterans' Affairs matters. This amendment will broaden the countries with which Australia can enter agreements beyond the Commonwealth. Veterans' reps in my electorate are supportive of this measure as it is beneficial to veterans who no longer live in Australia. At the moment, only payments payable under the Veterans' Entitlements Act are covered by existing agreements. This bill will now cover allied veterans and Defence Force members with the type of service equivalent to that covered by the VEA. The means that the agreements will relate to payments and treatment provided by the Repatriation Commission or the MRCC. We are supportive of this measure that will extend agreements so that veterans are covered, regardless of the legislative framework.

We hear from veterans and advocates about the lengthy and complicated claims process that people can face when seeking assistance. Labor supports the changes that will assist people in this process to make their lives easier, bearing in mind the need to ensure adequate safeguards are in place to protect veterans' privacy. One way this bill will do this is by addressing the doubling and sometimes the tripling of the requirement for veterans to undergo medicals when they engage in the system. The situation at the moment is that a veteran who was medically discharged needs to undergo a medical and then, when they go to the Commonwealth Superannuation Corporation to organise their payments, they undergo another medical, and this may be followed by a third medical when they go to the Department of Veterans' Affairs for assistance. The amendments in this bill will enable information to be shared between the Commonwealth Superannuation Corporation and the Department of Veterans' Affairs. This will enable the CSC to access relevant claims information held by the department. Information would include relevant medical and rehab information which would assist the CSC to make quicker superannuation benefit assessments. This will, in turn, assist the department in determining a person's entitlement to incapacity payments. The upside of such sharing would be a more timely outcome for veterans at a vulnerable and stressful time in their lives.

Schedule 7 looks to eliminate the unnecessary delays in administrative issues that are caused when certain veterans' affairs portfolio legislative instruments need to be amended to incorporate changes in non-disallowable instruments. Each individual instrument will no longer need to be lodged in parliament. One such example is when a new rehabilitation appliance becomes available. Availability of the new equipment is delayed, as a legislative instrument that incorporates the document under which the applicant may be provided the equipment needs to be amended to refer to the policy document's changed date. Eliminating such delays would have a real and beneficial impact on veterans' lives and should be supported.

Labor supports the measures in this bill which go to streamlining and improving the law as it improves the processes that affect veterans' lives. With the amendments the government is planning on moving, we on this side of the House offer our support of the legislation. Once again, I congratulate the Minister for Veterans' Affairs on his work and that of his department in this regard, and also the shadow minister for veterans' affairs, the member for Kingston, and her office for all of their work in this portfolio.

See this speech in context