Gavin Pearce (Braddon, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Health, Aged Care and Indigenous Health Services) Share this | Hansard source

It's an honour today to speak in relation to the Veterans' Entitlements, Treatment and Support (Simplification and Harmonisation) Bill 2024. In doing so, I want to outline some of the scope of the bill, but I also want to detail some of the other issues and some of the other implications that I see that we could possibly include as we approach our service to our veterans. The objective of the VETS Bill is to simplify and to harmonise the legislation governing the rehabilitation and compensation for veterans. Currently, there are three separate acts for this. They all operate to provide entitlements, compensation and rehabilitation support to our veterans.

I enlisted in the Australian Army in 1985, and I discharged at the end of 2004. I am covered by all three of these acts. Let me tell you that it's confusing at best. Currently, as I said, there are three separate acts. Let's go through them in more detail. Firstly, we have the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986, the VEA. Secondly, we have the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation (Defence-related Claims) Act 1988, the DRCA. Finally, we have the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004, MRCA. These three acts are over 2,000 pages. They are complex and they include more than 850 legislative instruments. They are confusing at best.

I take my hat off to all our advocates, out there in veterans' worlds today, all across the country doing great work with our veterans, not only supporting them and guiding them through this legislation but also providing that helping hand and providing that mateship that takes that veteran through that process. I want to acknowledge that, and I want to thank them today on behalf of a grateful nation. Our advocates do a great job. This bill that we're dealing with today applies all of these three to try and simplify the process to make it simpler for our veterans.

I'm not going into the detail; I think it's already been detailed enough. Instead, I want to run through some of the issues that I see that could have been included. They are possibly missed opportunities or future opportunities, if you like, that we could consider. I consider the bill, even in its revised state, to be dealing with illness rather than wellness. I think that if we are to deal with and tackle the issue of getting our veterans to make the transition from the big family that is the military into a new family which is civilian life and maybe a job or another worthwhile vocation, then we need to have that wellness focus.

Secondly, the military, whether it be in Navy, the Army or the Air Force, is a big family. I don't have the words to explain the bond that we have in the service of arms. That mateship that everyone talks about—I can tell you now that it's a real thing. Many ask me what I miss from my 20 years of service in the Army. I don't miss the Army, and I don't think the Army misses me, but I do miss the certain look that a digger gives you. What I mean by that is that there's a look of absolute trust. It can't be replicated. It can't be forged. It's a very genuine look, when you know damn well that they've placed their life in your hands. They get that look when you put them in danger, and the stronger the danger the more acute that is and the stronger this look is. It's that look that I miss. It's that trust that I miss. It's that bond that I miss.

I was a senior soldier in my unit, as a warrant officer. My job was to make sure that they did the right thing. I was the enforcer of the military discipline system. If they did the wrong thing, I kicked them in the backside—I really did. I was hard on them. I made sure that they followed their mission. I made sure that they cleaned their rifle, that they followed their SAPs and all the rest of it. But I was also the bloke that stood in front of them when someone was picking on and when someone was trying to take advantage of them. I stood in front of them and I protected them. That's what diggers do. Honestly, in this place, I can pride myself today in saying that I always stuck up for my diggers. I will continue to stick up for them for the rest of my life. I mean that very sincerely.

When it comes to the delineation and the difference between an illness and wellness, I think no better example could be given than a project that we've got up in the north-west coast of Tasmania. It's called the north-west Veterans' and Families' Centre. It encompasses all those words, and it really underpins the very viability of this organisation. It's headed up by a bloke I served with—a guy who's a former major, ammunition technician, bomb expert, called Andrew Clarke. When he exited from Defence, they said, 'What do you want to do, Major Clarke, as you exit and go into civilian life?' He said: 'I want to be a GP. I want to continue to help people but in a different vein.' He's now one of the best general practitioners that we have on the north-west coast. He heads up that north-west Veterans' and Families' Centre. He and a lady called Jo Lovell, who's a former Navy officer, are doing a fantastic job.

The focus at the north-west Veterans' and Families' Centre isn't on illness. Yes; he's a doctor. He treats that. He supports that. He guides the veteran through that. But, more so, it's on wellness. It's on prevention. At the centre of this is family. I talked earlier, if you recall, about the Defence Force being a big family and the bond that exists. I gave you an example of that. When a veteran is discharged from the Defence Force, be it of their own fruition or, like in my case, through medical discharge, then you feel as if, in your heart and soul, that you are excluded from that tribe—from that family. You have no tribe, and some wander aimlessly. Some wander for the rest of their lives if they don't find a new tribe. Our job, Defence's job, parliament's job, Australia's job is to reconnect them to a new family. The only way that we can do that—the best and the most effective way that we can do that—is through their family, their immediate family. We can bang on about veterans all we like; I get that. But if we don't include the family, then that's all they've got.

To that end—and I'll give you an example of this—there's also another doctor that helps me out. He's a clinical psychiatrist in Hobart. His name is Dr Jon Lane. He is, as far as I'm concerned—I'm pretty sure I'm right when I say this—the only clinical psychiatrist in Australia that has served in combat as a doctor in Afghanistan. He knows what he's talking about. He's been through the ringer. He's been shot at, and he's helping others. We are developing a program down there. Currently our veterans have to leave the great state of Tasmania in order to receive acute care for PTSD. Patients need to go to Greensborough hospital in ward 17. They dread that. They go there without their families. They do a six-week program. They are given drugs to make them sleep. Some of them haven't slept for years. When they exit that, they're back into their family life again. The family doesn't necessarily know where they've been or what they've been subjected to.

What we want to do is to build a facility, a home—imagine something like a Ronald McDonald house—where the families can go. Jon Lane has developed a program which deals with the families as well. Those kids need to know why mum or dad feels the way that they do. That intergenerational trauma that's subjected down into the children needs to be dealt with. They take the family through that program. At the end of it, that family is the one that reinforces the skills, the knowledge and the attitude that's learnt on this treatment program. It's a beautiful system. That family focus is something that isn't talked about often, but I believe it's the key that will unlock the future for veterans.

Along with that, they need a purpose. We have a very clear, succinct mission focus in the Army, in the Navy and in the Air Force. The mission focus isn't necessarily there once we exit. We need to reconnect them to a new purpose, to a new way of life and to a new goal. We need to maintain their self-confidence and their pride. Employment will do that.

I think there's not enough focus being put on not only employment for the veteran and the acknowledgment of the unique set of skills, knowledge and attitude that they've developed over their careers in the military and how they can integrate and cross over into civilian life but also the spouse and whether they are happy and employed and have a purpose. So we need to also look at employment for the spouse and schooling for the children. They may have special needs and all the rest of it, but the family is at the centre of this. I wish, I pray and I make the point strongly today that families are at the centre of that integration, in going from being military families to new civilian families.

I want to acknowledge today all those veterans that are doing it tough—support is out there. One of the things that gets under my skin is when people often feel sorry for our veterans. They pity them. Let me tell everybody today: please, do not pity our veterans. They don't deserve our pity; they deserve our respect. The pity parties have got to stop. Life on the couch has got to end. That individual, be it whoever, needs to get off that couch. There is always support there and there is always someone that will help you, but you need to take that first step yourself. That support will never go away. It will always remain—a bit like what I said at the very start, when I first stood up here. I said I will never forget them and I'll never stop supporting them. So we need to also remember that—that support will always be there. That takes much of the load away.

Finally, as I close, there's not only one thing that gets under my skin; there are several. The other issue that I want to raise today is that not always do veterans know the path that they need to take. That needs to be subtly put across. They need to be guided and they need to be treated with respect. Pity and respect are two things that should never be mixed. We wouldn't do it in the military, so why would we do it anywhere else?

I want to thank all our young Australians. I've had the unique privilege of working with literally some of Australia's most gifted, motivated, professional, smart and driven young Australians. I've worked for some of the best military leaders anywhere in the world. I'm not going to name them, but that experience changes you and changes your life. There's not a day, particularly in this place—even as I stand here—when I'm not using skills that I picked up during my 20 years of service.

Finally, not every veteran does it tough either, so I don't want the business world out there in Australia, across the country, to think that employing a veteran will cause trouble or give grief. Employing a veteran is good for your business. Employing a veteran will help your business, and it will help those around them. So I think we should tell more good stories as well, because there are far more good stories than bad. A young bloke knocked on my door not long ago. I hadn't seen him since I served. He was one of my electronic warfare corporals. I said, 'Stretty, what are you doing?' He said, 'I've invented a thing called an electromagnetic pulse countermeasure technology for geo-orbital satellite technology, and I've got a Defence contract.' They're the stories that we need to tell. That transferable knowledge and those skills are helping that bloke, and he's had some help along the way.

This bill will help them. This bill will simplify the process. We, as a collective, as a parliament, can make that happen seamlessly, but I want to remember and I want to raise those other points that I raised about family, about wellness and about looking forward. As far as I'm concerned, we can't be looking down, because, if you look down, you'll fall over.

See this speech in context