Andrew Broad (Mallee, National Party, Assistant Minister to the Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Hansard source

I too want to talk about the Veterans’ Entitlements Amendment Bill 2018 and about the importance of standing by veterans. Having not had that privilege of serving, I do want to pay tribute to people who have served, and of course Deputy Speaker Hastie would be aware of that. The Veterans Entitlements Amendment Bill 2018 was introduced into the House of Representatives on 22 August 2018. It reinstates an inadvertently removed provision to offset pension overpayment from bereavement payments in one streamlined transaction. Essentially, we want to stand by veterans and their families in the event of a bereavement to make it easier for people. People who have served our country are people we should be proud of. We spend a lot of time talking about the 102,000 Australians who have been killed in conflict. We probably don't spend quite enough time honouring those who have served and who, as a result of their service, have gone through some difficult times upon their returning.

I'm keen to add, while talking about this bill, an idea that's been put forward in my patch around assisting veterans upon their return. I live in a rural electorate. My electorate is 36 per cent of the state of Victoria, is an agricultural electorate and was historically set up by soldier settlements. Those soldier settlements were established after the First World War and also after the Second World War to stand by and to give opportunity to people who were returning from service, people who were sometimes traumatised. In those days, they didn't know fully about things such as post-traumatic stress syndrome. It saddens me to go to the cemetery and see the graves of young men who returned and who took their lives as a result of post-traumatic stress syndrome after the First World War and Second World War.

A Vietnam veteran came to me, a guy by the name of Ian Hastings, a grain grower, involved with farming systems. He is keen to take those who have served and see how they could be incorporated into the grain industry. One of the great things about working in the Australian grain industry is that they do get to drive big machines—harvesters, boon sprays—and use GPS technology. They are struggling to find people to work in those industries in more remote areas. And the idea has been put forward to me that we could once again, in some regards, have a soldier settlement scheme, taking people who are returning from their service, who are looking for gainful employment and incorporate them into those rural communities in rural Australia, particularly in our agriculture industry.

This would be a bipartisan position held across this parliament but I don't think we collectively are doing enough for our veterans. We are probably not standing by the people who have stood by Australia as fully as we should. When it comes to people who have served, we really should honour them in a greater sense. One of the great privileges as a member of parliament is the ability to do a military exchange. I know one of the members in the chamber here came with me at the start of last year to Afghanistan to see what our serving men and women serving were doing over there. What struck me was the calibre of the people we met.

Interestingly enough, as members of parliament we had to wear KingGee clothing. We don't get to wear uniform when we go over there. When I was sitting there in the mess hall having breakfast, one of the members of the Defence Force said to me, 'Who are you blokes?' I said, 'We're members of parliament.' And he goes, 'Oh, I thought you looked like a Jim's Mowing team.' He was very impressed that members of parliament would come over and see our serving troops. One of the questions I asked these people who were serving was how they are with their family time and what support services there are for their family. The very nature of the work and the hours, particularly with the difference in travel time, meant that those people weren't able to have contact with their families. So not only are they not as supported as they could be whilst serving; we also need to support them more fully upon their return.

The beauty of this bill is to try to address a small misdemeanour, essentially saying that, if someone has been overpaid but has also passed away, that can be rolled into one. I think it is important that we do more in this space. There are some great organisations, such as Soldier On and our traditional RSLs. I recently met with our RSL in Mildura. It was encouraging to me to see that a new generation of RSL were coming through. There was a guy there who was a young former soldier, and he was very active in the RSL and talking to our young children, particularly in our primary schools.

One of the things that I do want to raise—and something that still gripes me—is the book work and recording around veterans. I was approached by a young lady of 28 who lived in Donald, Victoria, in my electorate. Her husband, who was a similar age, had served two terms in Afghanistan. He was driving a water truck for the local council, but he needed a knee reconstruction. Unfortunately, he couldn't prove through records of the time of his service that the knee had been damaged in service. I've got to say, from the small time I spent in Afghanistan on that military exchange, walking around with the body armour on, it was pretty evident to me that would have had an impact on his knee. The knee reconstruction was going to cost $4,000. He was having difficulty, as a dad with two kids and a wife, having to climb up and down on a water truck for the council—and we wouldn't pay the $4,000.

I think that's to our shame. I think that's something where there really should have been no argument, and I would have thought that our department would put less of an onus on proof and have more of a fair-go type of attitude to that sort of situation. That's something I wanted to put on the record. I would like to see a more open attitude, I guess, towards supporting people who may have an injury as a result of their military service. To my way of thinking, that injury was a result of his military service. Deputy Speaker Hastie, you would of course be able to make more of a judgement call as to whether something like that would be a result of his military service. But, even if it wasn't, my view is that $4,000 for someone who has served our country so that they can get their leg patched up and so they can continue working is a pretty good investment, and we should have just covered it.

There are now over 30,000 soldiers who have returned from our Afghanistan engagement and the conflict in the Middle East region. That's quite a lot. We should be proud of them. Their service should be recognised on the memorials in our country towns. We march every year on Anzac Day to remember those who have served. I would like to see the names on those memorials updated to include not only those who have given their life but also those who have served. I think that's something we should encourage.

There's another thing I'm also keen to see. We have suburbs in new parts of our cities. If you look across the Wimmera Mallee you will see the memorials in the country towns, because of course in the First World War and the Second World War those towns were where the people were. But I believe we should also have new memorials, with the names of those who have served in Afghanistan, in the suburbs of cities. I think that's a challenge for our local councils in our new suburbs, that they should consider putting up memorials for those who have served in our Afghanistan conflict. It would be a great opportunity.

I commend this bill and I'm happy to have had a few moments to talk about the service of our Australian troops. I believe there is a lot of merit, particularly, in getting those country communities to welcome back and use the troops in their agricultural field. I will continue to talk about that with the Minister for Veterans' Affairs. I'm pleased that we are standing by those who have given so much for our country.

See this speech in context